Uko~*-. 


REESE  LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 


Class 


THE  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN  OF  1860 


THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

NEW  YORK   •    BOSTON   •    CHICAGO 
SAN  FRANCISCO 

MACMILLAN  &  CO.,  LIMITED 

LONDON   •    BOMBAY   •    CALCUTTA 
MELBOURNE 

THE  MACMILLAN  CO.  OF  CANADA,  LTD. 

TORONTO 


THE 

PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 
OE  1860 


BY 

EMERSON   DAVID   FITE,   PH.D. 

ASSISTANT   PROFESSOR    OF    HISTORY   IN   YALE   UNIVERSITY 

AUTHOR    OF    "SOCIAL   AND    INDUSTRIAL   CONDITIONS 

IN   THE   NORTH   DURING    THE   CIVIL   WAR" 


Nefo 
THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

1911 

All  rights  reserved 


''*) 


COPTBIOHT,   1911, 

BY  THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY. 


Set  up  and  electrotyped.     Published  September,  1911. 


Nortoaoti 

J.  8.  Cashing  Co.  —  Berwick  &  Smith  Co. 
Norwood,  Mass.,  U.S.A. 


PREFACE 

PRESIDENTIAL  campaigns  in  the  United  States  are  great  pop 
ular  debates,  in  which  different  sections  of  the  country  and  differ 
ent  political  parties  join  in  discussing  concrete  propositions  of 
national  policy  from  various  points  of  view,  and  sometimes  pass 
judgments  of  far-reaching  importance ;  almost  invariably,  the 
contests,  with  their  divergent  moods  and  appeals,  well  merit 
close  study.  Yet,  strangely  enough,  they  have  hitherto  been 
neglected  as  subjects  for  historical  investigation,  so  that  the 
present  volume,  as  far  as  the  author's  knowledge  extends,  is  the 
first  serious  work  done  in  the  field.  My  attention  was  first 
directed  to  the  war  elections  by  Professor  Edward  Channing, 
to  whom  I  am  glad  to  render  cordial  thanks. 

The  publication  of  the  party  platforms  in  the  Appendix  is 
self-explanatory ;  the  four  typical  campaign  speeches,  hitherto 
not  readily  accessible,  are  printed  because  of  the  valuable  light 
which  they  throw  on  the  arguments  offered  to  the  people  in 

the  crisis. 

EMERSON  DAVID  FITE. 
NEW  HAVEN,  CONNECTICUT, 
October,  1910. 


234440 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

INTRODUCTION •        .        .  ix 

CHAPTER 

I.    JOHN  BROWN ..,..1 

II.     HELPER'S  "  IMPENDING  CRISIS  "  AND  THE  SPEAKERSHIP  CON 
TEST 33 

III.  ANTI-SLAVERY  IN  THE  HOUSE  AND  SENATE    .        .        .        .47 

IV.  THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  .....  59 
-"""•y.    THE  DEMOCRATIC  CONVENTIONS 92 

THE  REPUBLICAN  CONVENTION       ^        .        .        .        .        .  117 

CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS 132 

VIII'.    LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN    ....  205 

v — * 

APPENDIX  A.     THE  PARTY  PLATFORMS       .        .        .        .        .        .  237 

APPENDIX  B.  REPUBLICAN  CAMPAIGN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  .  244 
APPENDIX  C.  DEMOCRATIC  CAMPAIGN  SPEECH  BY  STEPHEN  A. 

DOUGLAS 276 

APPENDIX  D.  DEMOCRATIC  CAMPAIGN  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L. 

YANCEY  .  . 301 

APPENDIX  E.  CONSTITUTIONAL  UNION  CAMPAIGN  SPEECH  BY  W.  G. 

BROWNLOW    .        .        .        . 330 

INDEX                                                                                                         ,  343 


vii 


INTRODUCTION 

THERE  have  been  more  exciting  and  enthusiastic  political 
campaigns  in  the  history  of  the  country  than  that  of  1860, 
such  as  those  of  1840  and  of  1856  ;  one  at  least  has  involved 
equally  important  issues,  that  of  1864 ;  but  never  has  a  cam 
paign  been  waged  in  which  the  people  of  the  whole  nation 
have  taken  a  more  calm,  serious,  and  intelligent  interest. 

The  most  characteristic  feature  of  this  campaign  was  the 
strong  control  over  the  political  situation  in  the  North  ex 
ercised  by  the  masses  of  the  people;  in  the  South  it  was 
more  of  a  battle  of  leaders.  From  the  moment  of  John 
Brown7 s  raid  and  the  dramatic  importance  suddenly  given 
in  the  House  of  Representatives  to  Hinton  Rowan  Helper's 
Impending  Crisis  to  the  day  of  the  election,  there  was  no 
moment  when  politics  were  not  under  popular  domina 
tion;  compared  with  the  point  of  view  of  the  people,  and 
their  words  and  deeds,  the  platforms  and  utterances  of 
leaders  were  of  minor  importance.  The  Harper's  Ferry 
raid  was  not  "a  mere  episode,  a  spectacular  incident,  with 
out  consequence  "  ;  everything  would  not  "  have  happened 
just  as,  in  fact,  it  did  happen,  if  Brown  had  never  lived, 
and  never  been  hung."  1  The  tide  of  the  "  irrepressible 
conflict "  had,  indeed,  by  that  tune  already  set  in,  but  the 
Charlestown  drama  further  agitated  the  fury  of  its  currents, 
added  to  their  volume,  and  immeasurably  accelerated  their 
speed.  The  resulting  popular  reaction  against  slavery  far 

1  This  quotation  is  an  opinion  expressed  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly, 
November,  1910,  p.  667,  by  John  T.  Morse,  Jr.,  in  a  review  of  John 
Brown:  A  Biography  Fifty  Years  After,  by  Oswald  Garrison  Villard, 
Boston,  1910. 

ix 


X  INTRODUCTION 

exceeded  any  ever  before  known.  Herein,  and  not  in  the 
mere  trial  and  execution,  must  be  sought  the  real  signifi 
cance  of  the  event.  The  South  now  with  new  hatred  ex 
pelled  from  its  midst  suspected  Northerners,  and  the  stories 
of  the  victims  aroused  new  animosities  in  the  North  against 
the  South ;  by  countless  fresh  aggressions,  one  following 
closely  upon  another,  and  persisting  throughout  the  can 
vass,  the  flames  of  sectional  hatred  were  fanned  brighter  and 
brighter. 

Homely,  almost  unnoticed  events  among  the  people  reveal 
the  full  influence  of  the  speakership  contest  and  of  Helper's 
Crisis.  With  suddenness  and  amid  unusual  excitement 
political  parties  were  led  to  commit  themselves  to  opinions 
from  which  there  could  be  no  retraction,  with  the  nomi- 
!  nating  conventions  and  the  summer's  campaign  close  at 
hand.  Conservatives  stiffened  in  their  conservatism,  the 
'  radicals  became  more  sturdy  and  uncompromising,  while 
between  the  two  surging  currents  William  H.  Seward,  not 
knowing  which  way  to  turn,  trembled  and  fell,  and  lost 
the  prize  of  a  presidential  nomination.  This  was  but  one  of 
the  effects  of  Brown's  raid,  wrought  through  an  aroused 
people. 

The  popular  judgment  of  slavery  dictated  the  party  plat 
forms,  and  later,  when  the  deceptions  and  evasions  of  these 
documents  became  apparent,  practically  determined  the 
issues  of  the  campaign  itself,  " slavery"  or  "no  slavery," 
" union"  or  "secession.^''  As  if  to  recognize  this  control  of 
the  people  and  helplessness  of  the  leaders,  the  Republicans 
held  their  convention  in  a  large  hall  before  ten  thousand 
spectators,  and  welcomed  the  active  interference  of  the  crowd 
in  that  body's  proceedings,  unconsciously  setting  a  precedent 
pregnant  with  evil  for  the  future ; ;/  significant,  too,  is  the 
fact  that  the  most  unique  demonstration  of  the  campaign, 
the  activities  of  the  Republican  marching  clubs,  the 
Wide-Awakes,  arose  spontaneously  from  the  people. 


INTRODUCTION  xi 

With  their  supreme  control  the  people  were  serious-minded ; 
physical  violence  and  offensive  personalities,  as  a  rule,  were 
conspicuously  absent ;  campaign  speeches  far  exceeded  in 
number  those  delivered  in  any  previous  contest,  and  were 
characterized  by  an  intellectual  tone  and  historical  breadth 
of  view  that  were  remarkable.  The  whole  history  of  the 
country,  and  its  social,  legal,  and  governmental  institutions, 
were  searched  for  proof  and  refutation ;  contemporary  so 
ciety,  manners,  and  customs  were  rigorously  held  up  to 
view,  analyzed,  and  judged.  Rarely  has  the  nation  taken  a 
broader  view  of  itself. 

Heckling  of  speakers  on  the  stump,  the  natural  expres 
sion  of  a  serious-minded  electorate  and  at  the  present  day  i 
common  in  English  political  life,  although  lacking  in  the  ; 
United  States,  was  now  prominent.    Douglas'  frank  answers 
on  secession  and  coercion,  Breckenridge's  evasive  answers 
on   the  same  topics,  Yancey's  evasions    on  secession,   and 
Douglas7  on  the  morality  of  slavery  were  marked  and  in 
fluential  features  of  the  struggle. 

Every  party  was  guilty  of  hedging  on  some  subject.  Both 
Republicans,  and  Breckenridgeites  to  some  extent,  kept 
clear  of  the  subject  of  secession,  the  latter  because  their 
desire  to  secede  was  better  concealed  for  the  moment, 
the  former  because  while  opposing  secession  they  did  not 
care  to  enhance  the  timeliness  of  the  subject  by  discussing 
it.  Republicans,  too,  generally  refused  to  meet  Douglas 
in  the  open  on  popular  sovereignty ;  Douglasites  would  not 
commit  themselves  on  the  morality  of  slavery,  while  the 
Bell-Everetts  hardly  knew  what  they  believed  on  any  topic. 
Except  for  their  Border  state  leader,  who  was  forced  to 
trim  in  order  to  carry  his  home  communities  with  him,  the 
Breckenridgeites  were  the  most  open  of  all  the  parties. 

Commercial  considerations,  although  not  usually  recog 
nized  as  one  of  the  factors  that  went  to  make  up  the  popular 
judgment  of  I860,  were  yet  of  considerable  weight.  North- 


Xll 


INTRODUCTION 


erners,  following  the  lead  of  Helper,  expressed  in  the 
Crisis,  and  of  Senator  Sumner  in  his  speech  on  "The  Bar 
barism  of  Slavery,"  were  fond  of  boasting  of  their  own 
commercial  prosperity  and  of  taunting  the  South  with  com 
mercial  inferiority;  only  rarely  did  a  Southerner  attempt 
an  answer,  and  then  with  sorry  results,  as  witness  William 
L.  Yancey,  in  his  New  York  speech.  Yet  the  single  crop  of 
cotton,  although  it  could  not  stand  in  comparison  with  the 
diversified  industries  and  pursuits  of  the  North,  was  sufficient 
cause  for  boasting.  But  it  is  almost  pathetic  to  behold  the 
strange  infatuation  that  prompted  Southerners  to  stake 
their  hopes  of  European  intervention,  and  through  this, 
their  hopes  of  an  independent  Southern  nation,  so  largely 
upon  the  world's  dependence  on  King  Cotton. 

In  the  last  analysis  the  one  complete  justification  of  seces 
sion  was  the  imperative  necessity  of  saving  the  vast  prop 
erty  of  slavery  from  destruction  ;  secession  was  a  commercial 
necessity,  designed  to  make  these  billions  secure  from  out 
side  interference.  Viewed  in  this  light,  secession  was  right, 
for  any  people,  prompted  by  the  commonest  motives  of  self- 
respect  and  self-defense,  and  with  no  moral  scruples  against 
slavery,  would  have  followed  the  same  course.  The  present 
generation  of  Northerners,  born  and  reared  after  the  war, 
must  shake  off  "then*  inherited  political  passions  and  prej 
udices,  and  pronounce  the  verdict  of  justification  for  the 
South.  Believing  slavery  right,  it  was  the  duty  of  the  South 
to  defend  it.  It  is  time  that  the  words  "traitors,"  "conspir 
ators,"  "rebels,"  and  "rebellion"  be  discarded.  But  the 
North  was  no  less  right  in  opposing  slavery,  for  theirs  was 
a  course  springing  from  the  natural  promptings  of  morality. 
History,  then,  must  adjudge  that  both  sides  in  the  contro 
versy  were  right,  and  that  the  war  was  bound  to  come  when 
the  opposing  sides  conscientiously  held,  the  one  to  the  wrong, 
the  other  to  the  right,  of  slavery. 

How  the  two  sections  came  to  hold  opposite  views  on 


INTRODUCTION  xiii 

slavery  is  a  problem  hard  to  solve,  though  Douglas'  famous 
dictum  would  seem  convincing.  "  Slavery,  therefore,  does 
not  depend  on  the  law.  It  is  governed  by  climate,  soil,  and 
productions,  by  political  economy." 

Commercial  factors,  in  this  early  day  of  the  Republican 
party,  when  moral  principles  have  generally  been  reckoned 
its  sole  stock  in  trade,  had  a  determining  influence  on  the 
dominant  party.  The  tariff,  internal  improvements,  a  Pacific 
railroad,  a  Pacific  telegraph,  and  a  Homestead  Act,  were  not 
mere  subterfuges  to  cover  up  offensive  tendencies  of  anti- 
slavery  ;  they  were  as  well  a  recognition  of  the  industrial 
needs  of  the  country.  The  West,  after  a  decade  of  rapid 
expansion,  now  loomed  large  in  the  public  eye;  already 
the  way  was  prepared  for  that  diversion  of  markets  and 
transportation  routes  to  the  new  section  that  characterized 
the  succeeding  war  period.  Develop  the  West  was  the  cry, 
fill  it  with  antislavery  immigrants  from  the  East  and  from 
Europe,  pass  the  Homestead  Act,  and  the  slavery  question 
will  be  settled. 

The  interested  student  of  political  science  finds  much  to 
attract  him  in  the  year's  happenings  ;  indeed,  his  is  the  best 
point  of  view  from  which  to  study  the  national  conven 
tions,  the  principle  of  availability  and  of  the  dark  horse 
in  the  Republican  convention,  which  gave  the  nation  its 
greatest  president,  not  for  his  own  known  qualities  but  for 
the  conscious  purpose  of  defeating  another,  and  the  wran 
gling  of  the  Democrats  over  the  unit  rule,  the  two-thirds  rule, 
convention  representation,  bolting,  and  the  powers  of  con 
vention  committees,  presiding  officers,  and  national  com 
mittees.  He  may  study  fusion  in  its  practical  workings, 
the  customary  powers  of  presidential  electors,  the  possi 
bilities  involved  in  a  presidential  election  in  the  House  of 
Representatives,  and  the  working  of  the  spoils  system  at  the 
height  of  its  power. 


PRESIDENTIAL   CAMPAIGN 


CHAPTER  I 

JOHN  BROWN 

ON  the  morning  of  Tuesday,  the  eighteenth  of  October, 
1859,  the  leading  New  York  papers  and  a  few  in  other 
cities  printed  vague  rumors  of  an  uprising  of  slaves  at  Har 
per's  Ferry,  Virginia,  and  almost  immediately  full  confirma 
tion  of  the  story  followed  the  first  dispatch,  as  detail  after 
detail  was  laid  before  the  country.  On  the  preceding  Sunday 
night,  the  sixteenth  of  October,  between  eleven  and  twelve 
o'clock,  a  band  of  twenty-two  men,  each  armed  with  a  rifle 
and  pistols,  rushed  across  the  Potomac  River  from  the 
opposite  Maryland  shore  and  took  forcible  possession  of  the 
little  Virginia  village  of  Harper's  Ferry,  first  of  the  streets, 
then  of  the  engine  house  and  the  government  arsenal  itself, 
and  finally  of  the  armory  a  half  mile  away.  In  an  immediate 
attempt  to  liberate  slaves,  armed  parties  of  the  raiders 
scoured  the  surrounding  regions  and  still  under  the  cover 
of  darkness  brought  in  as  prisoners  three  or  four  gentleman 
slaveholders  with  their  slaves 

Within  two  hours  a  passenger  train,  arriving  on  the  Balti 
more  and  Ohio  Railroad,  was  arrested  at  the  bridge,  but  was 
soon  allowed  to  go  on  its  way,  —  the  bearer  of  the  first  in 
telligence  of  trouble  to  the  outside  world ;  in  the  darkness 
and  confusion  at  the  bridge  a  negro  porter  in  the  employ  of 
the  railroad  was  killed,  although  the  village  itself  was  not  dis- 


..PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


turbed.  When  the  villagers  stirred  at  daybreak,  workmen 
coming  to  the  government  works  were  fallen  upon  and  im 
prisoned,  until  the  number  of  prisoners  in  the  hands  of  the 
attacking  party  totalled  over  forty.  Even  then,  Monday 
morning  was  far  advanced  before  the  real  situation  was  well 
known  to  all  the  citizens.  From  the  nearby  towns  of  Charles- 
town  and  Martinsburg,  ten  and  twenty  miles  away,  armed 
relief  parties  set  out,  but  before  their  arrival  the  inhabitants 
of  Harper's  Ferry  recaptured  the  outlying  armory  after 
bloody  fighting  and  forced  the  surrender  of  many  prisoners 
at  the  arsenal.  Ten  leading  hostages,  however,  still  re 
mained  in  the  engine  house  under  the  close  guard  of  eight 
or  nine  of  the  invaders,  and  were  not  released  until  this 
stronghold  was  carried  by  storm  by  United  States  marines 
under  the  command  of  Robert  E.  Lee,  troops  sent  posthaste 
from  Washington  by  President  Buchanan  at  the  urgent 
request  of  the  Governor  of  Virginia.  In  the  entire  encounter, 
from  the  midnight  attack  until  the  final  surrender,  four  of 
the  inhabitants  of  the  town  were  killed  and  ten  of  the  con 
spirators,  while  seven  of  the  latter  suffered  arrest  and  five 
escaped.  Not  a  slave  left  his  master.1 

The  leader  of  this  ill-fated  expedition,  John  Brown  of 
Ossawatomie,  and  all  his  followers,  were  militant  antislavery 
crusaders,  who  had  but  recently  arrived  from  the  war-ridden 
territory  of  Kansas,  where  in  the  support  of  their  principles 
they  had  been  guilty  of  many  dastardly  crimes,  including 
robbery  and  murder ;  it  was  there  in  the  West,  in  fact,  that 
they  had  planned  the  Virginia  raid,  which  was  to  be  simply 
a  repetition  of  the  nigger-stealing  raids  which  the  band  had 
carried  on  from  Kansas  into  Missouri. 

Despite  his  record  Brown  proved  to  be  a  remarkable  man, 
as  even  his  enemies  admitted.  An  unsympathetic  Ohio 
Congressman,  who  visited  him  in  prison  before  his  trial 
and  while  his  wounds  were  still  fresh,  reported :  "It  is  vain 

1  U.  S.  Senate  Reports,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  No.  278. 


JOHN  BROWN  3 

to  underestimate  either  the  man  or  the  conspiracy.  Cap 
tain  John  Brown  is  as  brave  and  resolute  a  man  as  ever 
headed  an  insurrection,  and  in  a  good  cause  and  with  a 
sufficient  force  would  have  made  a  consummate  partisan 
commander.  He  has  coolness,  daring,  persistence,  the  stoic 
faith  and  patience,  and  a  firmness  of  will  and  purpose  un 
conquerable.  He  is  the  furthest  removed  from  the  ordinary 
ruffian,  fanatic,  or  madman." 1  Governor  Wise  of  Virginia 
said:  "They  are  mistaken  who  take  him  for  a  madman. 
He  is  a  man  of  clear  head,  courageous  fortitude,  and  simple 
ingenuousness.  He  is  cool,  collected,  indomitable ;  and  it 
is  but  just  to  him  to  say  that  he  was  humane  to  his  prisoners ; 
and  he  inspired  all  with  great  trust  in  his  integrity  and  as  a 
man  of  truth.  He  is  a  fanatic,  vain  and  garrulous,  but  firm, 
truthful,  intelligent."  2 

In  an  interview  with  a  reporter  of  the  New  York  Herald 
and  others,  Brown  himself  explained  his  purposes  in  words 
the  simple  grandeur  of  which  went  straight  to  the  Northern 
heart.  "Mr.  Mason.  How  do  you  justify  your  acts? 
Mr.  Brown.  I  think,  my  friend,  you  are  guilty  of  a  great 
wrong  against  God  and  humanity.  I  say  it  without  wishing 
to  be  offensive,  and  it  would  be  perfectly  right  for  any  one 
to  interfere  with  you,  so  far  as  to  free  those  you  wickedly 
and  willfully  hold  in  bondage.  I  do  not  say  this  insultingly. 
Mr.  Mason.  I  understand  that.  Mr.  Brown.  I  think  I 
did  right  and  that  others  will  do  right  who  interfere  with 
you  at  any  and  at  all  times ;  I  hold  that  the  Golden  Rule, 
'Do  unto  others  as  you  would  that  others  should  do  unto 
you,'  applies  to  all  that  would  help  others  to  gain  their 
liberty.  A  Bystander.  Do  you  consider  this  a  religious 
movement?  Mr.  Brown.  It  is,  in  my  judgment,  the 
greatest  service  that  a  man  can  render  to  God.  Bystander. 

1  The  American  Conflict,  by  Horace  Greeley,  Hartford,  1864-1866, 1,  294. 

2  History  of  the  Rise  and  Fall  of  the  Slave  .Power  in  America,  by  Henry 
Wilson,  Boston,  1872-1877,  II,  595. 


4  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Do  you  consider  yourself  an  instrument  in  the  hands  of 
Providence  ?  Mr.  Brown.  I  do.  Bystander.  Upon  what 
principle  do  you  justify  your  acts  ?  Mr.  Brown.  Upon  the 
Golden  Rule.  I  pity  the  poor  in  bondage  that  have  none 
to  help  them;  that  is  why  I  am  here;  not  to  gratify  any 
personal  animosity  or  vindictive  spirit.  It  is  my  sympathy 
with  the  oppressed  and  the  wronged,  that  are  as  good  as 
you  and  as  precious  in  the  sight  of  God.  .  .  .  Mr.  Val- 
landigham.  Who  are  your  advisers  in  this  movement  ?  Mr. 
Brown.  I  cannot  answer  that.  I  have  numerous  sym 
pathizers  throughout  the  entire  North.  ...  I  want  you 
to  understand,  Gentlemen,  (to  the  reporter  of  the  Herald) 
—  you  may  report  that  —  I  want  you  to  understand  that  I 
respect  the  rights  of  the  poorest  and  the  weakest  of  the 
colored  people  oppressed  by  the  slavery  system,  just  as  much 
as  I  do  those  of  the  most  wealthy  and  powerful.  This  is  the 
idea  that  has  moved  me,  and  that  alone.  We  expected  no 
reward  except  the  satisfaction  of  endeavoring  to  do  for  those 
in  distress  and  greatly  oppressed  as  we  would  be  done  by. 
The  cry  of  distress  of  the  oppressed  is  my  reason,  and  the 
only  thing  that  prompted  me  to  come  here.  ...  I  wish 
to  say  further,  that  you  had  better,  all  you  people  of  the 
South,  prepare  yourselves  for  a  settlement  of  this  question 
that  must  come  up  for  settlement  sooner  than  you  are  pre 
pared  for  it.  The  sooner  you  are  prepared,  the  better. 
You  may  dispose  of  me  very  easily.  I  am  nearly  disposed 
of  now;  but  this  question  is  still  to  be  settled,  this  negro 
question,  I  mean ;  the  end  of  that  is  not  yet."  1 

With  such  eloquence  Brown  won  the  heart  of  the  North 
and  made  of  himself  a  hero,  whose  trial,  following  within  a 
few  weeks,  became  in  reality  a  trial  of  the  antislavery  North 
by  the  state  courts  of  Virginia.  Every  act  done,  every  word 
spoken  in  the  drama  in  the  Charlestown  Court  House  was 
reported  and  read  throughout  the  country,  the  prisoner's 

The  Liberator,  October  28,  1859. 


JOHN  BROWN  5 

perfect  frankness  in  admitting  everything,  his  uniform 
courtesy  to  the  court,  his  patience  while  lying  on  the  bed  of 
pain  before  judge  and  jury,  with  many  wounds  still  gaping 
and  fresh,  and  finally  the  undue  haste  of  the  whole  procedure. 
Neither  for  securing  sympathetic  counsel  for  the  accused 
nor  for  summoning  distant  witnesses  was  ample  time  allowed. 
All  was  haste. 

When,  on  November  first,  after  a  verdict  of  "  guilty  of 
treason  and  conspiring  and  advising  with  slaves  and  others 
to  rebel,  and  murder  in  the  first  degree"  had  been  suddenly 
reached,  Brown  was  brought  into  court  and  asked  if  he  could 
give  any  reasons  why  sentence  should  not  be  passed  upon 
him,  though  surprised  and  confused,  he  spoke  as  follows : 
"In  the  first  place  I  deny  everything  but  what  I  have  all 
along  admitted,  the  design  on  my  part  to  free  the  slaves. 
I  intended  certainly  to  have  made  a  clean  thing  of  that  mat 
ter,  as  I  did  last  winter  when  I  went  into  Missouri  and  there 
took  slaves  without  the  snapping  of  a  gun  on  either  side, 
moved  them  through  the  country,  and  finally  left  them  in 
Canada.  I  designed  to  have  done  the  same  thing  again  on 
a  larger  scale.  That  was  all  I  intended.  I  never  did  intend 
murder  or  treason  or  the  destruction  of  property,  or  to  incite 
or  excite  slaves  to  rebellion  or  to  make  insurrection.  I  have 
another  objection,  and  that  is,  it  is  unjust  that  I  should  suffer 
such  a  penalty.  Had  I  interfered  in  the  manner  which  I  ad 
mit  has  been  fairly  proved  (for  I  admire  the  truthfulness  and 
candor  of  the  greater  portion  of  the  witnesses  who  have 
testified  in  this  case),  had  I  so  interfered  in  behalf  of  the  rich, 
the  powerful,  the  intelligent,  the  so-called  great,  or  in  behalf 
of  any  of  their  friends,  either  father,  mother,  brother,  sister, 
wife,  or  children,  or  any  of  that  class,  and  suffered  and 
sacrificed  what  I  have  in  this  interference,  it  would  have  been 
all  right,  and  every  man  in  this  court  would  have  deemed  it 
an  act  worthy  of  reward  rather  than  of  punishment. 

"This  court  acknowledges,  as  I  suppose,  the  validity  of 


6  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

the  law  of  God.  I  see  a  book  kissed  here,  which  I  suppose 
to  be  the  Bible  or  at  least  the  New  Testament.  That  teaches 
me  that  all  things  '  whatsoever  I  would  that  men  should  do 
to  me,  I  should  do  even  so  to  them.'  It  teaches  me  further 
to  remember  those  that  are  in  bonds  as  bound  with  them. 
I  endeavored  to  act  upon  that  instruction.  I  say  that  I 
am  yet  too  young  to  understand  that  God  is  any  respecter 
of  persons.  I  believe  that  to  have  interfered  as  I  have  done, 
as  I  have  always  freely  admitted  I  have  done,  in  behalf  of 
His  despised  poor,  was  not  wrong,  but  right.  Now  if  it  be 
deemed  necessary  that  I  should  forfeit  my  life  for  the  fur 
therance  of  the  ends  of  justice,  and  mingle  my  blood  further 
with  the  blood  of  my  children,  and  with  the  blood  of  millions 
in  this  slave  country,  whose  rights  are  disregarded  by  wicked, 
cruel,  and  unjust  enactments,  I  submit  —  so  let  it  be 
done.  .  .  ."  l 

For  one  month  more,  till  the  day  of  execution,  Brown  lan 
guished  in  prison,  denying  himself  to  all  callers  and  inter 
viewers,  refusing  the  hundreds  of  requests  for  his  autograph, 
devoting  himself,  rather,  almost  entirely  to  voluminous 
correspondence.  Many  of  his  letters  were  published,  and 
for  loftiness  of  thought,  appropriateness  of  diction  and  senti 
ment,  and  sweetness  and  tenderness  of  spirit,  they  may  be 
ranked  among  the  world's  great  letters.  Where  did  the 
untutored  man  learn  the  English  language?  Where,  if 
not  in  the  same  school  as  the  great  War  President,  Abraham 
Lincoln  ?  Letters  of  sympathy  were  answered,  gifts  acknowl 
edged,  the  care  of  his  wife  and  family  recommended  to  friends, 
a  "perfectly  practical"  education  outlined  for  his  children. 
In  many  letters  he  sought  to  comfort  his  family.  "Dear 
wife  and  children  —  every  one,"  he  wrote;  "I  will  begin 
by  saying  that  I  have  in  some  degree  recovered  from  my 
wounds,  but  that  I  am  quite  weak  in  my  back  and  sore  about 

1  The  American  Conflict,  by  Horace  Greeley,  Hartford,  1864-1866, 
I,  294. 


JOHN  BROWN  7 

my  left  kidney.  My  appetite  has  been  quite  good  for  most 
of  the  time  since  I  was  hurt.  I  am  supplied  with  almost 
everything  I  could  desire  to  make  me  comfortable,  and  the 
little  I  do  lack  (some  articles  of  clothing  which  I  lost)  I  may 
perhaps  get  again.  I  am  besides  quite  cheerful,  having 
(as  I  trust)  the  peace  of  God,  which  'passeth  all  understand 
ing'  to  'rule  in  my  heart/  and  the  testimony  (in  some  degree) 
of  a  good  conscience  that  I  have  lived  not  altogether  in  vain. 
I  can  trust  God  with  both  the  time  and  the  manner  of  my 
death,  believing,  as  I  now  do,  that  for  me  at  this  time  to  seal 
my  testimony  (for  God  and  humanity)  with  my  blood,  will 
do  vastly  more  toward  advancing  the  cause  I  have  earnestly 
endeavored  to  support  than  all  I  have  done  in  all  my  life 
before.  I  beg  of  you  all  meekly  and  quietly  to  submit  to 
this,  not  feeling  yourself  in  the  least  degraded  on  that  account. 
Remember,  dear  wife  and  children  all,  that  Jesus  of  Naza 
reth  suffered  a  most  excruciating  death  on  the  cross  as  a 
felon,  under  the  most  aggravating  circumstances.  Think, 
also,  of  the  prophets  and  apostles  and  Christians  of  former 
days,  who  went  through  greater  tribulation  than  you  or  I; 
and  (try  to)  be  reconciled.  May  God  Almighty  comfort  all 
your  hearts,  and  soon  wipe  away  all  tears  from  your  eyes. 
To  Him  be  endless  praise.  Think,  too,  of  the  crushed 
millions  who  have  no  comforter.  I  charge  you  all  never 
(in  all  your  trials)  to  forget  the  griefs  of  'the  poor  that  cry 
and  of  them  that  have  none  to  comfort  them/  ...  I  greatly 
long  to  hear  from  some  one  of  you  and  to  learn  anything 
that  in  any  way  affects  your  welfare.  I  sent  you  ten  dollars 
the  other  day.  Did  you  get  it  ?  I  have  also  endeavored  to 
stir  up  Christian  friends  to  visit  and  write  to  you  in  your 
deep  affliction.  I  have  no  doubt  that  some  of  them,  at  least, 
will  heed  the  call.  Write  to  me,  care  of  Captain  John  Avis, 
Charlestown,  Jefferson  County,  Virginia.  'Finally,  my 
beloved/  'be  of  good  comfort.'  May  all  your  names  be 
written  in  the  'Lamb's  Book  of  Life/  may  you  all  have  the 


8  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

purifying  and  sustaining  influence  of  the  Christian  religion, 
is  the  earnest  prayer  of  your  affectionate  husband  and 
father,  * 

JOHN  BROWN. 

"P.S.  I  cannot  remember  a  night  so  dark  as  to  have 
hindered  the  coming  day,  nor  a  storm  so  furious  and  dreadful 
as  to  prevent  the  return  of  warm  sunshine  and  a  cloudless 
sky.  But,  beloved  ones,  do  remember  that  this  is  not  your 
rest,  that  in  this  world  you  have  no  abiding  place  or  continu 
ing  city.  To  God  and  His  infinite  mercy  I  always  commend 
you.  J.B." 

Slaveholding  and  slavery-supporting  clergymen  of  the 
community,  seeking  to  comfort  him,  he  summarily  repulsed. 
To  one  who  sought  to  harmonize  Christianity  and  slavery 
he  replied:  "My  dear  sir,  you  know  nothing  about  Chris 
tianity  ;  you  will  have  to  learn  the  A  B  C's  in  the  lesson  of 
Christianity,  as  I  find  you  entirely  ignorant  of  the  meaning 
of  the  word.  I,  of  course,  respect  you  as  a  gentleman,  but 
it  is  as  a  heathen  gentleman.7'  Here  the  argument  closed.1 

The  day  of  execution  was  Friday,  December  2.  Brown 
stepped  from  the  jail  with  " radiant  countenance"  ;  passing 
a  little  negro  baby  he  stooped  tenderly  and  kissed  it ;  at  a 
negro  woman,  exclaiming  as  he  passed,  "God  bless  you,  old 
man  !  I  wish  I  could  help  you,  but  I  can't/'  he  looked  in 
silence  with  tears  in  his  eyes.  Attended  by  militia  he  rode 
alone  in  a  wagon  to  the  gray  stubble  field  on  the  edge  of  the 
city,  the  place  of  execution,  where  thousands  of  soldiers  were 
drawn  up  in  waiting.  "It  has  been  a  characteristic  of  me 
from  infancy  not  to  suffer  from  physical  fear.  I  have  suf 
fered  a  thousand  times  more  from  bashfulness  than  from 
fear,"  he  declared  on  the  journey.  Almost  his  last  words 

1  The  American  Conflict,  by  Horace  Greeley,  Hartford,  1864-1866, 
I,  296. 


JOHN  BROWN  9 

were  to  his  jailer :  "  I  have  no  words  to  thank  you  for  all  your 
kindness  to  me."  1  Thus  the  felon's  death  was  turned  to 
triumph,  and  in  the  North  the  same  spirit  of  triumph  marked 
the  many  celebrations  in  honor  of  the  event,  mingling  with 
the  tone  of  sadness  and  transforming  it.2 

Frank  Leslie's  Illustrated  Weekly  published  a  striking 
full-page  picture  of  the  execution.  At  a  public  meeting  in 
Cleveland  the  martyr's  words  were  hung  up  in  banners : 
"John  Brown,  the  hero  of  1859,"  " Remember  those  that  are 
in  bonds  as  bound  with  them,"  "If  I  had  interfered  in  behalf 
of  the  great,  the  wealthy,  and  the  wise,  no  one  would  have 
blamed  me,"  "I  do  not  think  I  can  better  serve  the  cause  I 
love  so  much  than  to  die  for  it."  In  Newburyport,  Massa 
chusetts,  stores  were  draped  in  mourning  and  bells  tolled ; 
in  West  Newbury  a  factory  draped ;  in  Amesbury  the  flags 
of  the  mills  kept  at  half-mast,  the  bells  tolled,  many  stores 
and  offices  draped,  and  a  public  meeting  held  in  the  evening ; 
in  Haverhill,  Georgetown,  Danvers,  and  Lynn  there  were  the 
same  demonstrations.  In  Albany,  New  York,  one  hundred 
guns  were  fired.  In  the  Massachusetts  State  Senate  a 
motion  to  adjourn  at  the  hour  of  execution  was  lost  by  only 
three  votes.  Thousands  of  Brown's  pictures  were  sold,  and 
also  thousands  of  copies  of  his  prison  letters  bound  in  pam 
phlet  form.  Within  four  weeks  Redpath's  life  of  Brown  was 
out,  and  in  Massachusetts  alone  twenty  thousand  copies 
were  quickly  sold.  Numberless  church  services  and 
public  meetings  were  held,  called  by  the  abolition  societies 
"for  the  furtherance  of  the  antislavery  cause,  and  renewedly 
to  consecrate  themselves  to  the  patriotic  and  Christian  work 
of  effecting  the  abolition  of  that  most  dangerous,  unnatural, 
cruel,  and  impious  system  of  slavery,  which  is  the  fruitful 
source  of  all  our  sectional  heartburnings  and  conflicts." 

1  The  American  Conflict,  by  Horace  Greeley,  Hartford,  1864-1866, 1,  296. 

2  In  all,  seven  of  the  conspirators  were  executed,  some  two  weeks  aftel 
Brown  and  some  as  late  as  March  of  the  next  year. 


10  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

At  one  of  these  meetings  in  Boston  William  Lloyd  Garrison 
passionately  cried :  "I  do  not  rise  on  this  occasion  to  define 
my  position  (laughter) ;  that  I  believe  Virginia  and  the  South 
clearly  understand,  and  I  as  clearly  understand  theirs. 
Between  us  there  is  an  '  irrepressible  conflict '  (applause) ; 
and  I  am  for  carrying  it  on  until  it  is  finished  in  victory  or 
in  death  (renewed  applause).  For  thirty  years  I  have  been 
endeavoring  to  effect  by  peaceful,  moral,  and  religious  in 
strumentalities,  the  abolition  of  American  slavery;  and  if 
possible,  I  hate  slavery  thirty  times  more  than  when  I  began, 
and  I  am  thirty  times  more,  if  possible,  an  abolitionist  of  the 
most  uncompromising  character  (loud  applause).  ...  A 
word  or  two  in  regard  to  the  characteristics  of  John  Brown. 
He  was  of  the  old  Puritan  stock,  a  Cromwellian,  who  believed 
in  God  and  at  the  same  time  in  '  keeping  his  powder  dry.' 
He  believed  in  'the  sword  of  the  Lord  and  of  Gideon,'  and 
acted  accordingly.  Herein  I  differed  widely  from  him. 
But  certainly  he  was  no  infidel,  oh,  no  !  How  it  would  have 
added  to  the  fiendish  malignity  of  the  New  York  Observer, 
if  John  Brown  had  only  been  an  infidel,  evangelically  speak 
ing  !  The  man  who  brands  him  as  a  traitor  is  a  calumnia 
tor  (applause).  The  man  who  says  that  his  object  was  to 
promote  murder,  or  insurrection,  or  rebellion,  is,  in  the  lan 
guage  of  the  Apostle,  'a  liar,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  him.' 
John  Brown  meant  to  effect  if  possible  a  peaceful  exodus 
from  Virginia.  But,  it  is  asked,  '  Did  he  not  have  stored  up 
a  large  supply  of  Sharp's  rifles  and  spears  ?  What  did  they 
mean  ? '  Nothing  offensive,  nothing  aggressive.  Only  this  : 
he  designed  getting  as  many  slaves  as  he  could  to  join  him, 
and  then  putting  into  their  hands  those  instruments  of  self- 
defense.  But,  mark  you,  self-defense ;  not  in  standing  their 
ground,  but  in  their  retreat  to  the  mountains;  or  in  their 
flight  to  Canada ;  not  with  any  design  to  shed  the  blood  or 
harm  the  hair  of  a  single  slaveholder  in  the  state  of  Virginia, 
if  a  conflict  could  be  avoided.  .  .  .  See  the  ferocious  spirit 


JOHN  BROWN  11 

of  the  Virginians  in  their  treatment  of  the  living  and  the 
dead.  Let  me  give  you  a  single  specimen,  as  narrated  by 
an  eyewitness.  This  is  Southern  testimony.  'The  dead 
lay  on  the  streets  and  in  the  river  and  were  subjected  to  every 
indignity  that  a  wild  and  madly  excited  people  could  heap 
upon  them.  Curses  were  freely  uttered  against  them  and 
kicks  and  blows  inflicted  upon  them.  The  large  mulatto 
that  shot  Mr.  Turner  was  lying  in  the  gutter  in  front  of  the 
arsenal,  with  a  horrible  wound  in  the  neck,  and  though  dead 
and  gory,  vengeance  was  unsatisfied,  and  many,  as  they 
ran  sticks  into  his  wound,  or  beat  him  with  them,  wished 
that  he  had  a  thousand  lives,  that  all  of  them  might  be 
forfeited  in  expiation  and  avengement  of  the  foul  deed  he 
had  committed.  Leeman  lay  upon  a  rock  in  the  river  and 
was  made  target  for  the  practice  of  those  who  had  captured 
Sharp's  rifles  in  the  affray.  Shot  after  shot  was  fired  at  him, 
and  when  tired  of  this  sport,  a  man  waded  out  to  where  he 
lay  and  set  him  up  in  grotesque  attitude,  and  finally  pushed 
him  off,  and  he  floated  down  the  stream/  Oh  !  the  spirit 
engendered  by  slavery  !  Is  there  anything  like  it  upon 
earth?  .  .  . 

"Was  John  Brown  justified  in  this  attempt?  Yes,  if 
Washington  was  in  his,  if  Warren  and  Hancock  were  in 
theirs.  If  men  are  justified  in  striking  a  blow  for  freedom, 
when  the  question  is  one  of  a  threepenny  tax  on  tea,  I  say 
they  are  a  thousand  times  more  justified,  when  it  is  to  save 
fathers,  mothers,  wives,  and  children  from  the  slave  coffle 
and  the  auction  block  and  to  restore  to  them  their  God- 
given  rights  (loud  applause).  Was  John  Brown  justified  in 
interfering  in  behalf  of  the  slave  population  of  Virginia,  to 
secure  their  freedom  and  independence?  Yes,  if  Lafayette 
was  justified  in  interfering  to  help  our  revolutionary  fathers. 
If  Kosciusko,  if  Pulaski,  if  Steuben,  if  de  Kalb,  if  all  who 
joined  them  from  abroad  were  justified  in  that  act,  then 
John  Brown  was  incomparably  more  so.  ... 


12  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

"  Who  instigated  John  Brown  ?  Let  us  see.  It  must  have 
been  Patrick  Henry  of  Virginia,  —  l  Give  me  liberty  or  give 
me  death.7  Why  do  they  not  dig  up  his  bones  and  give  them 
to  the  consuming  fire,  to  show  their  abhorrence  of  his  mem 
ory  ?  It  must  have  been  Thomas  Jefferson,  another  Virgin 
ian,  who  said  of  the  bondage  of  the  Virginia  slave,  that  'one 
hour  of  it  is  fraught  with  more  misery  than  ages  of  that 
which  our  fathers  rose  in  rebellion  to  oppose/  and  who 
as  the  author  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  proclaimed 
it  to  be  a  '  self-evident  truth,  that  all  men  are  created  equal 
and  endowed  by  their  Creator  with  an  inalienable  right  to 
liberty/  Beyond  all  question  it  must  have  been  Virginia 
herself,  who  by  her  coat  of  arms,  with  its  terrible  motto, 
Sic  semper  tyrannis,  asserts  the  right  of  the  oppressed  to 
trample  their  oppressors  beneath  their  feet,  and  if  necessary, 
to  consign  them  to  a  bloody  grave."  l 

Victor  Hugo,  in  the  following  letter  to  a  London  news 
paper,  spoke  the  sentiment  of  enlightened  Europe  and  re 
echoed  the  American  abolitionists  :  "  Brown,  stretched  upon 
a  truckle-bed,  with  six  half -closed  wounds,  a  gun-shot  wound 
in  the  arm,  one  in  his  loins,  two  in  the  chest,  two  in  the  head, 
almost  bereft  of  hearing,  bleeding  through  the  mattress,  the 
spirits  of  his  two  dead  sons  attending  him;  his  four  fellow 
prisoners  crawling  around  him;  Stephens  with  four  saber 
wounds;  justice  in  a  hurry  to  have  done  with  the  case; 
an  attorney,  Hunter,  demanding  that  it  be  dispatched  with 
sharp  speed;  a  judge,  Parker,  assenting;  the  defense  cut 
short ;  scarcely  any  delay  allowed ;  forged  or  garbled  ac 
counts  put  in  evidence ;  the  witnesses  for  the  prisoner  shut 
out;  the  defense  clogged;  two  guns,  loaded  with  grape, 
brought  into  the  court,  with  an  order  to  the  jailer  to  shoot 
the  prisoners  in  case  of  an  attempt  at  rescue ;  forty  minutes' 
deliberation ;  three  sentences  to  death.  I  affirm  on  my  honor, 
that  all  this  took  place,  not  in  Turkey,  but  in  America."  2 

1  The  Liberator,  December  16,  1859. 
8  The  Liberator,  December  31,  1859. 


JOHN  BROWN  13 

The  deeds  of  the  abolitionists  supplemented  their  words. 
Said  George  L.  Stearns  of  Boston:  "From  first  to  last  I 
understood  John  Brown  to  be  a  man  opposed  to  slavery, 
and  as  such,  that  he  would  take  every  opportunity  to  free 
slaves  where  he  could ;  I  did  not  know  in  what  way ;  I  only 
knew  that  from  the  fact  of  his  having  done  it  in  Missouri 
in  the  instance  referred  to;  I  furnished  him  with  money 
because  I  considered  him  as  one  who  would  be  of  use  in  case 
such  troubles  arose  as  had  arisen  previously  in  Kansas; 
that  was  my  object  in  furnishing  the  money ;  I  did  not  ask 
him  what  he  was  to  do  with  it."  Samuel  G.  Howe,  a  physi 
cian  of  the  highest  professional  and  social  standing  in  Boston, 
said:  "I  contributed  to  his  aid  at  various  times."  "His 
aid  —  in  what  way  ?  "  "In  the  same  way  that  I  contributed 
to  the  aid  of  other  antislavery  men ;  men  who  give  up  their 
occupations,  their  industry,  to  write  papers  or  to  deliver 
lectures,  or  otherwise  to  propagate  antislavery  sentiments. 
I  give  as  much  money  every  year  as  I  can  possibly  afford."  1 

These  radicals  cared  little  whether  or  not  Brown  was 
insane ;  they  were  ready  for  a  hero,  and  swept  on  by  the  full 
tide  of  excitement  they  gave  little  or  no  heed  to  the  most 
significant  affidavits  published  by  Brown's  counsel  when  he 
was  struggling  for  delay  in  the  trial.  Nineteen  persons 
swore  to  statements  going  to  show  Brown's  insanity  for 
several  years  past,  and  proving  beyond  a  doubt  the  extraordi 
nary  fact  of  the  insanity  of  no  fewer  than  thirteen  of  his  near 
relatives,  —  a  grandmother,  two  aunts,  an  uncle,  a  sister,  five 
cousins,  two  sons,  and  a  niece ;  all  of  which,  when  added  to 
Brown's  unusual  language  and  behavior  as  to  slavery,  the 
character  of  the  expedition,  and  the  strange  constitution 
found  among  his  papers,  which  he  had  apparently  drawn  up 
in  anticipation  of  a  new  government  to  be  established,2 
would  certainly  seem  to  render  belief  in  his  monomania  at 

1  U.  S.  Senate  Reports,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  No.  278. 
*  See  p.  21,  note. 


14  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

least  plausible.     But  madman  or  no  madman,  thousands 
hailed  him  hero.1 

Southern  radicals  were  as  much  wrought  up  as  those  in 
the  North,  but  with  a  passion  all  their  own  —  the  deed  must 
not  be  allowed  to  happen  again ;  there  must  be  no  more 
John  Browns.  It  was  no  mere  abstract  question,  but  a  most 
serious  practical  situation  which  now  confronted  the  men 
and  women  of  the  South ;  saneness  and  sobriety  of  judgment 
seemed  almost  out  of  the  question,  and  small  wonder  that  a 
distorted  notion  of  self-preservation  and  an  angry  debate 
with  the  North  on  slavery  carried  them  away.  "Do  you 
read  your  Bible,  Mrs.  Childs?"  hotly  inquired  Mrs.  Mason 
of  Virginia,  the  wife  of  a  United  States  Senator,  of  a  prom 
inent  Northern  abolitionist.  "If  you  do,  read  there  :  '  Woe 
unto  you,  hypocrites/  and  take  to  yourself,  with  twofold 
damnation,  that  terrible  sentence,  for,  rest  assured,  in  the 
day  of  judgment  it  shall  be  more  tolerable  for  those  thus 
scathed  by  the  awful  words  of  the  Son  of  God  than  for  you. 
You  would  soothe  with  sisterly  and  motherly  care  the  hoary- 
headed  murderer  of  Harper's  Ferry !  A  man  whose  aim 
and  intention  was  to  incite  the  horrors  of  a  servile  war  — 
to  condemn  women  of  your  own  race,  ere  death  closed  their 
eyes  on  their  sufferings  from  violence  and  outrage,  to  see  their 
husbands  and  fathers  murdered,  their  children  butchered, 
the  ground  strewn  with  the  brains  of  their  babes.  The  ante 
cedents  of  Brown's  band  proved  them  to  have  been  the  off 
scourings  of  the  earth ;  and  what  would  have  been  their 
fate  had  they  found  as  many  sympathizers  in  Virginia  as 
they  seem  to  have  in  Massachusetts.  Now,  compare  your 
self  with  those  your  sympathy  would  devote  to  such  ruth 
less  men,  and  say,  on  your  word  of  honor,  which  has  never 
been  broken,  would  you  stand  by  the  bed  of  an  old  negro, 
dying  of  a  hopeless  disease,  to  alleviate  his  suffering  as  far 
as  human  aid  could  ?  Have  you  watched  the  last  lingering 

1  The  Boston  Daily  Advertiser,  December  2,  1859. 


JOHN  BROWN  15 

illness  of  a  consumptive,  to  soothe,  as  far  as  in  you  lay,  the 
inevitable  fate?  Do  you  grieve  with  those  near  you,  even 
though  their  sorrows  resulted  from  their  own  misconduct? 
Did  you  ever  sit  up  until  the  'wee  hours'  to  complete  a  dress 
for  a  motherless  child,  that  she  might  appear  on  Christmas 
day  in  a  new  one,  along  with  her  more  fortunate  companions  ? 
We  do  these  things  and  more  for  our  servants,  and  why? 
Because  we  endeavor  to  do  our  duty  in  that  state  of  life  it 
has  pleased  God  to  place  us.  ...  You  reverence  Brown 
for  his  clemency  to  his  prisoners  !  Prisoners  !  and  how  taken  ? 
Unsuspecting  workmen,  going  to  their  daily  tasks,  unarmed 
gentlemen,  taken  from  their  bed  at  the  dead  hour  of  night 
by  six  men  doubly  and  trebly  armed.  Suppose  he  had  hurt 
a  hair  of  their  heads,  do  you  suppose  any  of  the  band  of  des 
peradoes  would  have  left  the  engine  house  alive?  And  did 
he  not  know  that  his  treatment  of  them  was  his  only  hope 
of  life  then  or  of  clemency  afterwards?" 

Without  noticing  the  Southern  woman's  natural  fear  of  a 
servile  insurrection,  Mrs.  Childs  replied:  "I  have  no  dis 
position  to  retort  upon  you  the  twofold  damnation  to  which 
you  consign  me.  On  the  contrary,  I  sincerely  wish  you  well, 
both  in  this  world  and  the  next.  If  the  anathema  proved  a 
safety  valve  to  your  boiling  spirit,  it  did  some  good  to  you, 
while  it  fell  harmless  upon  me.  .  .  .  You  refer  me  to  the 
Bible,  from  which  you  quote  the  favorite  text  of  slaveholders, 
'  Servants,  be  subject  to  your  masters  with  all  fear ;  not  only 
to  the  good  and  gentle,  but  also  to  the  fro  ward.'  1  Peter 
2 : 18.  Abolitionists  also  have  their  favorite  texts,  to  some 
of  which  I  would  call  your  attention.  *  Remember  those 
that  are  in  bonds  as  bound  with  them.'  Hebrews  13 : 3. 
'  Thou  shalt  not  deliver  unto  his  master  the  servant  which  is 
escaped  from  his  master  unto  thee.  He  shall  dwell  with  thee 
where  it  liketh  him  best.  Thou  shalt  not  oppress  him.' 
Deuteronomy  23: 15, 16.  ...  I  would  especially  commend  to 
slave  owners  the  following  portions  of  that  volume,  wherein 


16  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

you  say  God  has  revealed  the  duty  of  masters.  '  Masters, 
give  unto  your  servants  that  which  is  just  and  equal,  knowing 
that  you  also  have  a  Master  in  Heaven.7  Colossians  4:1. 
'  Neither  be  ye  called  masters,  for  one  is  your  master,  even 
Christ,  and  all  ye  are  brethren.7  Matthew  23 : 8-10. 
'  Whatsoever  ye  would  that  men  should  do  unto  you,  do  ye 
even  so  to  them.7  Matthew  7:12.  'Woe  unto  him  that 
useth  his  neighbor's  service  without  wages,  and  giveth  him 
not  for  his  work.7  Jeremiah  22  : 13.  .  .  . 

"If  the  appropriateness  of  these  texts  is  not  apparent,  I 
will  try  to  make  it  so,  by  evidence  drawn  entirely  from 
Southern  sources.  .  .  .  The  universal  rule  of  the  slave 
states  is  that  '  the  child  follows  the  condition  of  its  mother.7 
This  is  an  index  to  many  things.  Marriages  between  white 
and  colored  people  are  forbidden  by  law ;  yet  a  very  large 
number  of  the  slaves  are  white  or  yellow.  When  Lafayette 
visited  this  country  in  his  old  age,  he  said  he  was  very  much 
struck  by  the  great  change  in  the  colored  population  hi  Vir 
ginia  ;  that  in  the  time  of  the  Revolution  nearly  all  the  house 
hold  slaves  were  black,  but  when  he  returned  to  America  he 
found  very  few  of  them  black.  The  advertisements  in 
Southern  newspapers  often  describe  runaway  slaves  that 
'pass  themselves  for  white  people.7  Sometimes  they  are 
described  as  having  'straight  black  hair,  blue  eyes,  and  clear 
complexion.7  This  would  not  be  unless  their  fathers,  grand 
fathers,  and  great-grandfathers  had  been  white  men.  But 
as  their  mothers  were  slaves,  the  law  pronounces  them  slaves, 
subject  to  be  sold  on  the  auction  block  whenever  the  neces 
sities  or  consciences  of  the  masters  or  mistresses  require  it. 
The  sale  of  one's  own  children,  brothers  or  sisters,  has  an 
ugly  aspect  to  those  who  are  unaccustomed  to  it ;  obviously, 
it  cannot  have  a  good  moral  influence,  that  law  and  custom 
should  render  licentiousness  a  profitable  vice. 

"Throughout  the  slave  states  the  testimony  of  no  colored 
person,  bond  or  free,  can  be  received  against  a  white  man. 


JOHN  BROWN  17 

You  have  some  laws  which  on  the  face  of  them  would  seem 
to  restrain  men  from  murdering  or  mutilating  slaves;  but 
they  are  rendered  nearly  null  by  the  law  I  have  cited.  Any 
drunken  master,  overseer,  or  patrol  may  go  into  the  negro 
cabins  and  commit  what  outrages  he  pleases  with  perfect 
impunity,  if  no  white  person  is  present  who  chooses  to  wit 
ness  against  him.  North  Carolina  and  Georgia  have  a 
large  loophole  of  escape  even  if  white  persons  are  present, 
when  murder  is  committed.  A  law  to  punish  persons  for 
'maliciously  killing  a  slave7  has  this  remarkable  qualification, 
'  always  providing  that  this  act  shall  not  extend  to  any  slave 
dying  of  moderate  correction/  We  at  the  North  find  it 
difficult  to  understand  how  moderate  punishment  can  cause 
death.  .  .  . 

"By  your  laws  all  a  slave's  earnings  belong  to  his  master. 
He  can  neither  receive  donations  nor  transmit  property. 
Your  laws  also  systematically  ami  at  keeping  the  minds  of 
the  colored  people  in  the  most  abject  state  of  ignorance.  If 
white  people  attempt  to  teach  them  to  read  or  write,  they 
are  punished  by  imprisonment  and  fines ;  if  they  attempt 
to  teach  others,  they  are  punished  with  from  twenty  to 
thirty-nine  lashes.  .  .  . 

"The  reliable  source  of  information  is  the  advertisements 
in  the  Southern  newspapers.  In  thef  North  Carolina 
(Raleigh)  Standard  Mr.  Micajah  Ricks  advertises  a  '  negro 
woman  and  two  children.  A  few  days  before  she  went  off, 
I  burned  her  with  a  hot  iron  on  the  left  side  of  the  face.  I 
tried  to  make  the  letter  M.'  In  the  Natchez  Courier  Mr.  J.  P. 
Ashford  advertises  a  runaway  negro  girl  'with  a  good  many 
teeth  missing  and  the  letter  A  branded  on  her  cheek  and 
forehead.7  In  the  Lexington  (Kentucky)  Observer  Mr. 
William  Overstreet  advertises  a  runaway  negro  'with  his 
left  eye  out,  scars  from  a  disk  on  his  left  arm,  and  much 
scarred  with  a  whip.'  I  might  quote  from  hundreds  of  such 
advertisements. 


18  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

"Another  source  of  information  is  afforded  by  your  fugi 
tives  from  justice,  with  many  of  whom  I  have  conversed 
freely.  .  .  .  « 

"Another  source  of  information  is  furnished  by  emanci 
pated  slave  holders.  .  .  . 

"Looking  at  the  system  of  slavery  in  the  light  of  all  this 
evidence,  do  you  candidly  think  that  we  deserve  'twofold 
damnation '  for  detesting  it?  Can  you  not  believe  that  we 
hate  the  system  and  yet  be  truly  your  friends?  I  make 
allowance  for  the  excited  state  of  your  mind  and  for  the 
prejudice  induced  by  education.  I  do  not  care  to  change 
your  opinion  of  me;  but  do  wish  that  you  would  be  per 
suaded  to  examine  this  subject  dispassionately  for  the  sake 
of  the  prosperity  of  Virginia,  and  the  welfare  of  unborn 
generations,  both  white  and  colored.  For  thirty  years 
abolitionists  have  been  trying  to  reason  with  slaveholders 
through  the  press  and  in  the  Halls  of  Congress.  Their  ef 
forts,  though  directed  to  the  masters  only,  have  been  met 
with  violence  and  abuse  equal  to  that  poured  on  the  head  of 
John  Brown.  Yet  surely  we,  as  a  portion  of  the  Union  in 
volved  in  the  expense,  degeneracy,  the  danger  and  the  dis 
grace  of  this  iniquitous  and  fatal  system,  have  a  right  to 
speak  about  it  and  a  right  to  be  heard  also.  .  .  . 

"To  the  personal  questions  you  ask  me,  I  will  reply  in  the 
name  of/all  the  women  of  New  England.  It  would  be  ex 
tremely  difficult  to  find  any  woman  in  our  villages  who  does 
not  sew  for  the  poor  and  watch  with  the  sick,  whenever  oc 
casion  requires.  We  pay  our  domestics  generous  wages, 
with  which  they  can  purchase  as  many  Christmas  gowns  as 
they  please,  a  process  far  better  for  their  characters  as  well 
as  our  own,  than  to  receive  their  clothing  as  a  charity,  after 
being  deprived  of  just  payment  for  their  labor.  I  have  never 
known  an  instance  where  the  pangs  of  maternity  did  not 
meet  with  requisite  assistance ;  and  here  at  the  North,  after 
we  have  helped  the  mothers  we  do  not  sell  the  babies.  I 


JOHN  BROWN  19 

really  believe  what  you  state  concerning  the  kindness  of  many 
Virginia  matrons ;  but,  after  all,  the  best  that  can  be  done  in 
that  way  is  a  poor  equivalent  for  the  perpetual  wrong  done 
to  the  slave,  and  the  terrible  liabilities  to  which  they  are 
always  subject.  Kind  masters  and  mistresses  among  you 
are  merely  lucky  accidents.  If  any  one  chooses  to  be  a 
brutal  despot,  your  laws  and  customs  give  him  complete 
power  to  do  so  ."  l 

Drastic  action  on  the  part  of  the  South  attended  the  angry 
discussion.  Stating  its  attitude  toward  the  presence  in 
their  midst  of  any  detested  Yankee  from  John  Brown's 
country,  the  Atlanta  Confederacy  declared  that  they  regarded 
every  man  in  their  midst  as  an  enemy  to  the  institutions  of 
the  South  who  did  not  declare  boldly  that  he  or  she  believed 
African  slavery  a  social,  moral,  and  political  blessing ;  whether 
born  at  the  South  or  at  the  North,  any  person  holding  other 
than  these  sentiments  was  unsound  and  should  be  requested 
to  leave  the  country.  From  every  one  a  confession  of  faith 
on  slavery  was  sought.  "Beecher  said  that  he  would  preach 
the  same  doctrines  in  Virginia  as  in  Massachusetts/'  ex 
claimed  a  Southerner  in  Congress,  two  weeks  after  Brown's 
death;  "I  ask  you  why  you  do  not  come  on?"  "I  will 
answer  the  gentleman  if  he  will  permit  me,"  quickly  retorted 
a  Northerner.  "I  will  tell  the  gentleman  why  Mr.  Beecher 
would  not  preach  in  Virginia ;  because  liberty  of  speech  is 
denied  in  the  South,  and  if  he  were  to  go  there  he  would  get 
a  coat  of  tar  and  feathers."  "Yes,  sir,"  assented  the  South 
erner;  "not  only  would  he  be  denied  liberty  of  speech  but 
he  would  be  denied  personal  liberty  also  and  would  be  hung 
higher  than  Haman."  On  the  last  day  of  the  year  1859 
twelve  families,  including  thirty-nine  persons,  arrived  in 
Cincinnati,  Ohio,  from  Berea,  Madison  County,  Kentucky, 
whence  they  had  been  forcibly  expelled  for  abolitionism. 
Madison  County,  near  the  center  of  the  state,  had  a  popu- 
1  The  Liberator,  December  31,  1859. 


20  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

lation  of  fifteen  thousand  people,  one  third  of  whom  were 
slaves ;  the  largest  town,  Berea,  was  an  antislavery  center 
under  the  influence  of  Rev.  John  G.  Fee,  who  had  organized 
several  churches  in  the  vicinity,  from  membership  in  all  of 
which  sympathizers  with  slavery  were  excluded.  There  was 
a  seminary  in  which  antislavery  was  openly  taught,  a  school, 
supported  by  public  money,  for  children  of  all  colors,  and  an 
abolition  postmaster  who  regularly  handled  abolition  mail 
from  the  North.  Opposition  to  slavery,  moral  opposition 
and  that  alone,  moved  the  community.  The  fatal  sixteenth 
of  October  arrived,  and  Fee,  then  in  New  York,  was  reported 
as  having  said  that  he  sympathized  with  Brown  and  that 
John  Browns  were  needed  in  Kentucky.  Then  came  a  public 
meeting  of  outraged  slaveholders,  the  inevitable  vigilance 
committee,  and  the  abolitionists  of  Berea  had  to  go.  The 
Governor  of  the  state,  to  whom  in  their  trouble  they  ap 
pealed,  gave  them  no  aid. 

James  Powers,  a  stonecutter  at  work  on  the  new  Capitol 
building  at  Columbia,  South  Carolina,  was  arrested  for 
seditious  speech  in  regard  to  Brown  and  slavery,  taken  before 
the  mayor  and  committed  to  prison,  whence  he  was  dragged 
by  a  mob,  whipped,  tarred  and  feathered,  and  sent  North. 
In  all  its  details  the  story  was  widely  heralded  in  such  papers 
as  the  New  York  Tribune,  the  New  York  Evening  Post,  and 
the  New  York  Independent.  James  Crangale,  who  suffered 
a  like  fate  in  Augusta,  Georgia,  finally  reached  New  York 
to  publish  his  story  in  the  same  way.  Small  H.  Fisk,  a  shoe 
dealer  in  Savannah,  Georgia,  and  a  native  of  Massachusetts, 
was  charged  with  expressing  general  abolition  sentiments 
and  with  reading  one  evening  to  some  negroes  in  his  store. 
He  was  called  out  of  the  store  at  night,  gagged  before  he 
could  make  resistance,  and  driven  outside  the  city,  where  he 
was  tarred  and  feathered.  The  News  of  the  city  added, 
"Not  a  spot  of  his  skin  was  left  visible,  and  his  hair  was 
trimmed  close  to  his  head."  A  peddler  of  fruit  trees  and 


JOHN  BROWN  21 

shrubbery  from  Rochester,  New  York,  driven  from  Asheville, 
North  Carolina,  was  hauled  before  a  great  public  meeting  at 
Knoxville,  Tennessee,  and  after  inflammatory  speeches  by 
prominent  men  was  given  three  days  in  which  to  get  out. 
Two  luckless  men  from  Savannah,  Georgia,  with  their  heads 
shaved  on  one  side,  arrived  in  New  York,  and  later  to  the 
same  place  came  two  young  ladies  from  Richmond,  Virginia, 
where  they  had  lost  their  positions  as  school-teachers.  A 
book  agent  was  arrested  in  Alabama  for  selling  Fleetwood's 
Life  of  Christ  and  was  brought  before  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Conference  for  judgment;  the  report  of  this  body  read  as 
follows  :  "  We  have  examined  this  man's  case.  We  find  no 
evidence  to  convict  him  with  tampering  with  slaves,  but  as  he 
is  from  the  North  and  engaged  in  selling  a  book  published 
in  the  North,  we  have  a  right  to  suspect  him  of  being  an 
abolitionist,  and  we,  therefore,  recommend,  in  order  to 
guard  ourselves  against  possible  danger,  that  he  be  immedi 
ately  conducted  by  the  military  out  of  this  county  into  the 
next  adjoining."  A  single  issue  of  a  local  Florida  paper, 
January,  1860,  contained  three  editorial  notices  to  the  public 
to  watch  out  for  certain  suspected  Northerners;  while  in 
Richmond,  Virginia,  the  Young  Men's  Christian  Association 
with  much  bravado  withdrew  a  previous  invitation  to  Bayard 
Taylor,  because  of  his  connection  with  the  editorial  staff  of 
the  unendurable  New  York  Tribune,  to  deliver  a  lecture  in 
Richmond  under  its  auspices. 

This  was  the  feeling  in  every  Southern  community ;  sus 
picion  constantly  attended  a  Northerner  in  the  South,  he  had 
no  freedom  of  speech  or  action,  he  was  not  wanted,  neither 
was  he  safe.  Thus  determined  were  the  slaveholders  to 
guard  against  more  John  Browns.1  It  was  a  natural  position. 

1  The  Provisional  Constitution  and  Ordinances  for  the  People  of  the 
United  States,  found  among  Brown's  papers,  was  in  one  sense  a  justifica 
tion  of  the  South  in  this  position.  This  document  sketched  a  government 
very  similar  to  that  of  the  United  States,  but  spoke  of  slavery  as  the  cause 


22  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

There  were  those  more  conservative  Southerners  who  ridi 
culed  Governor  Wise  as  "  General  Fussation"  for  keeping  so 
many  thousand  militia  at  Harper's  Ferry  for  four  weeks  and 
more  at  an  expense  to  the  state  of  $200,000 ;  they  deemed 
the  display  mere  politics,  designed  to  make  the  Governor 
President.  But  the  critics  could  not  stay  the  common 
hostility  toward  Northern  people.  Throughout  the  year 
1860  hundreds  of  luckless  people  from  the  free  states  were 
expelled  from  the  slave  country  with  more  or  less  violence, 
until  the  matter  became  an  issue  in  the  presidential  cam 
paign.1 

By  formal  state  law  in  Virginia,  Maryland,  North  Carolina, 
Alabama,  and  Texas,  copies  of  Northern  newspapers,  such  as 
the  New  York  Tribune,  the  New  York  Christian  Advocate,  the 
Albany  Evening  Journal,  the  Springfield  Republican,  and 
Harper's  Weekly,  upon  being  received  in  the  local  post  offices 
were  burned  by  the  postmasters,  and  to  this  outrage  the 
pliant  administration  at  Washington  offered  no  objection  be 
yond  informing  the  Southerners  that  before  they  destroyed 
the  papers  they  must  examine  them  copy  by  copy  and  not 
burn  all  issues  because  of  one.  Southern  students,  resident  in 
the  North,  were  affected  by  the  prevailing  excitement.  The 
departure  southward  of  over  two  hundred  medical  students 
from  Philadelphia,  possibly  for  a  regular  vacation,  though 
this  contingency  was  never  mentioned,  was  widely  heralded 
south  of  the  Ohio  River  as  a  sign  of  the  times;  passing 
through  Richmond  they  listened  to  bombastic  Governor 
Wise  in  a  most  fiery  speech,  filled  with  praise  for  shaking  the 
dust  of  the  unfriendly  North  from  their  feet  and  with  denun 
ciation  of  John  Brown's  land.  In  Missouri,  the  legislature 

of  the  constitution,  spoke  of  the  "enemy,"  and  "confiscated  property" 
given  up  to  the  common  store,  of  "prisoners,"  of  those  who  gave  up  slaves 
"voluntarily"  and  of  the  "neutrals."  This  was  a  menace  which  Brown's 
words  in  prison  could  not  assuage.  See  U.  S.  Senate  Reports,  36  Cong., 
1  Sess.,  No.  278. 
1  See  pp.  215-217. 


JOHN  BROWN  23 

refused  to  the  antislavery  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  a 
charter  for  a  university,  to  be  located  at  the  state  capital ; 
they  favored  education,  but  not  the  antislavery  kind. 

A  favorite  threat  concerned  commercial  intercourse.  As 
is  well  known,  the  South  in  this  regard  was  dependent  on  the 
North;  in  the  words  of  Governor  Wise  everything  in  the 
South  came  from  the  Yankees,  from  the  churns  in  the  dairies 
to  the  clocks  in  the  parlor.  But  public  meetings  were  now 
called  to  advocate  direct  trade  with  Europe.1  State  legis 
latures  considered  bills  to  encourage  such  trade  by  tax  ex 
emption,  while  at  the  same  time  heavier  taxes  were  to  be 
levied  on  the  Northern  traveling  salesmen ;  prominent  men 
appeared  in  homespun,  and  to  cap  the  climax  the  editor  of 
a  Georgian  paper  published  a  white  and  black  list  of  New 
York  merchants,  proslavery  and  antislavery,  with  the 
former  of  whom  it  was  recommended  that  the  South  should 
trade  and  should  taboo  the  latter.  When  the  editor  later 
appeared  in  New  York  to  correct  his  lists,  the  vials  of  Horace 
Greeley's  wrath  could  no  longer  be  contained ;  to  be  kicked 
into  the  nastiest  part  of  the  gutter  was  the  only  fate  suitable 
for  the  contemptible  blackmailer.  Yet  scores  of  New  York 
merchants  affected  to  welcome  the  Southerner  and  with 
many  favors  sought  a  place  on  the  white  list.  Perhaps 
the  success  of  the  movement  was  the  secret  spring  of  the 
Tribune  editor's  outburst,  for  the  commercial  element  of  the 
city  was  strongly  pro-Southern  and  remained  so  throughout 
the  year. 

A  veiled  and  indefinite  purpose,  a  vague  threat,  perhaps, 
was  couched  in  the  immediate  formation  of  local  military 
companies  in  many  Southern  towns,  where  daily  and  weekly 
drills  and  tournaments  were  common. 

In  the  Southern  legislatures  a  determined  effort  was  made 
to  give  political  support  to  Virginia.  Scarcely  was  John 

1  Southern  commercial  conventions  had  long  agitated  this  question, 
but  had  never  accomplished  anything. 


24  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Brown  dead  when  South  Carolina  passed  the  following 
resolutions:  "Whereas,  the  state  of  South  Carolina,  by  her 
ordinance  of  A.D.  1852,  affirmed  her  right  to  secede  from  the 
Confederacy  whenever  the  occasion  should  arise,  justifying 
her,  in  her  judgment,  in  taking  that  step ;  and  in  the  resolu 
tion  adopted  by  her  convention  declared  that  she  forbore 
the  immediate  exercise  of  that  right,  from  considerations 
of  expediency  only;  and  whereas,  more  than  seven  years 
have  elapsed  since  that  convention  adjourned,  and  in  the 
intervening  time  the  assaults  upon  the  institution  of  slavery 
and  upon  the  rights  and  equality  of  the  Southern  states, 
have  increasingly  continued,  with  increasing  violence,  and 
in  new  and  alarming  forms,  be  it  therefore,  First,  Resolved, 
That  the  slaveholding  states  should  have  a  convention  for 
united  action.  .  .  .  Third,  That  delegates  especially  be 
sent  to  Virginia  to  express  to  the  authorities  of  that  state  the 
cordial  sympathies  of  the  people  of  South  Carolina  with  the 
people  of  Virginia,  and  their  earnest  desire  to  unite  with  them 
in  measures  of  common  defense." 

Upon  the  receipt  of  this  call,  bitter  contests  were  precipi 
tated  in  the  various  states,  which  ran  for  a  few  weeks  and 
ended  in  the  defeat  of  the  proposed  convention;  not  one 
state  followed  the  lead  of  South  Carolina.  The  Carolinian 
Commissioner  made  long  speeches  both  before  the  legislature 
and  before  the  people  of  Virginia,  breathing  defiance  to  the 
North  and  by  every  art  of  the  orator  attempting  to  stir  the 
Virginians  to  action.  But  he  failed.  The  sober,  second 
thought  of  the  people,  though  greatly  agitated,  was  not  yet 
ready  for  extremes. 

Proslavery  political  leaders,  framing  their  views  pre 
paratory  to  the  coming  presidential  campaign,  also  fell  vic 
tims  to  the  prevailing  excitement  and  clothed  their  senti 
ments  in  language  unusually  radical.  The  following  typical 
resolutions  were  framed  in  Georgia  on  the  day  that  Brown 
died:  "We,  a  portion  of  the  citizens  of  Mclntosh  County, 


JOHN  BROWN  25 

believing  that  a  fearful  crisis  in  our  national  existence 
is  at  hand,  and  that  the  attempt  to  raise  an  insurrection 
at  Harper's  Ferry  is  but  a  faint  index  of  the  impending  evil 
that  threatens  the  slaveholding  states,  deem  it  the  duty  of 
every  citizen  to  think  calmly,  resolve  with  firmness,  and  act 
with  decision,  do  announce  to  the  Union  and  to  the  whole 
world  the  views  we  entertain,  and  the  course  we  think  ought 
to  be  pursued.  Resolved,  That  by  the  laws  both  of  God  and 
man,  the  slave  is  the  property  of  his  master,  and  that  by  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States  the  general  government  is 
bound  to  protect  us  in  the  possession  of  this  species  of  prop 
erty,  both  by  statute  and  treaty.  Resolved,  That  those 
states  that  encourage  or  permit  the  abolitionists  to  devise 
plans  to  rob  us  of  our  slaves,  have  violated  and  are  still 
violating  the  constitution  of  the  United  States.  Resolved, 
That,  although  we  would  be  glad  to  see  our  Union  go  on 
prospering -and  to  prosper,  yet  recent  events  show  that  our 
rights  are  not  only  disregarded  but  are  assailed,  and  we  are 
threatened  with  all  the  desolation  and  horrors  attendant 
upon  a  servile  war.  Resolved,  That  we  call  upon  the  non- 
slaveholding  states  to  carry  out  in  good  faith  the  constitution 
of  the  Union,  by  putting  down  the  abolitionists  and  their 
abettors,  and  if  they  persist  in  their  hostility  to  our  institu 
tions  we  feel  it  a  duty  to  ourselves  and  a  duty  to  our  institu 
tions  to  sever  our  connections  with  them.  Resolved,  That 
the  greatest  curse  that  has  ever  befallen  the  South  was  to 
submit  to  any  compromise.  That  in  every  compromise  that 
we  have  made  we  have  been  defrauded  out  of  our  just  rights. 
That  in  the  future  we  intend  to  declare  to  the  Northern 
states  our  rights,  and  these  rights  we  intend  to  maintain,  if  it 
costs  our  heart's  last  drop  of  blood.  That  we  recommend  to 
our  delegates  to  the  Charleston  convention  to  contend  for 
the  rights  of  the  South ;  and  if  voted  down  by  the  Northern 
states,  that  the  Southern  delegates  withdraw,  and  call  upon 
the  South  to  call  a  convention  to  nominate  candidates  for 


26  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

president  and  vice  president,  to  be  run  by  the  people  of  the 
South,  pledged  to  stand  up  and  defend  our  Southern  rights. 
Resolved,  That  the  cause  of  Virginia  is^the  cause  of  the  South, 
and  that  we  stand  ready  and  willing  to  march  to  her  aid  or 
any  other  Southern  state  when  assailed."  l 

The  conservative  classes  in  the  North,  used  from  long 
custom  to  taking  their  principles  from  the  Southern  radicals, 
now  stuck  fast  to  their  old  friends  and  roundly  denounced 
John  Brown  and  all  his  followers ;  they  insisted  that  slavery 
was  right  and  that  the  South  should  not  be  disturbed  and 
goaded  into  secession.  The  editor  of  the  Columbus  (Ohio) 
Statesman,  a  prominent  Democratic  politician  and  a  regular 
attendant  at  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  suddenly 
arose  and  left  the  church  and  vowed  that  he  never  would 
return  when  his  pastor  in  a  public  discourse  spoke  of  Brown 
as  "one  who  stepped  from  the  gallows  to  the  portals  of 
Heaven"  ;  for  similar  reasons  six  Democrats  withdrew  from 
a  Massachusetts  church  service.  Everywhere  churches 
were  distraught.  In  many  cities  "Union-saving"  meetings 
were  held,  conservative  gatherings  called  to  attest  anew  the 
value  of  the  union  of  the  states,  fraternal  devotion  to  the 
Southern  members  of  the  Confederacy,  a  determination  to 
do  them  justice,  and  undying  hatred  of  John  Brown.  In 
Lowell,  Massachusetts,  Portsmouth,  New  Hampshire,  New 
York,  Albany,  Rochester,  etc.,  slavery  was  praised.  Said 
Mr.  Charles  0' Conor,  a  leader  of  the  New  York  bar,  at  a 
meeting  in  that  city :  "I  insist  that  negro  slavery  is  not  only 
just  (hisses  and  disorder)  —  I  maintain,  gentlemen,  that 
negro  slavery  is  not  unjust,  that  it  is  benign  in  its  influence  on 
the  white  man  and  on  the  black  man ;  that  it  is  ordained  by 
nature  itself ;  that  it  carries  with  it  duties  for  the  black  man 
and  duties  for  the  white,  which  duties  cannot  be  performed 
except  by  the  preservation,  and  if  the  gentlemen  please  it, 
the  perpetuation  of  the  system  of  negro  slavery."  Said 

1  The  New  York  Herald,  January  1,  1860. 
« The  Liberator,  January  20,  1860. 


JOHN  BROWN  27 

Caleb  Gushing,  whom  many  called  the  most  unscrupulous 
of  Northern  politicians:  "I  showed  you  how  under  the  in 
fluence  of  their  malign  teachings  all  party  action  North  and 
South  was  running  in  the  channel  of  a  desperate  and  deplor 
able  sectionalism,  and  that  above  all,  here  in  Massachusetts, 
all  the  political  influences  dominant  in  the  state  were  founded 
upon  the  single  emotion  of  hate,  aye  !  hate,  treacherous 
ferocious  hate  of  our  fellow-citizens  in  the  Southern  states. 
Under  the  influence  of  this  monomania,  they  have  set  up  in 
this  commonwealth  a  religion  of  hate,  aye  !  a  religion  of  hate 
such  as  belongs  only  to  the  condemned  devils  in  hell.  I  say 
it  is  a  religion  of  hate  and  blasphemy.  Oh  God  !  that  such 
things  are  in  this  our  day."  1 

The  meeting  in  Rochester,  New  York,  framed  the  following 
resolutions  :  "Whereas,  recent  events,  occurring  in  different 
portions  of  our  common  country,  have  made  prominent  the 
continued  union  of  the  States  composing  our  Confederacy ; 
and  whereas  it  has  been  thought  proper  for  the  citizens  of 
Rochester  to  assemble  in  public  meeting  to  declare  their 
sentiments  on  this  question.  Therefore,  Resolved,  That 
we  affirm  and  reiterate  our  fealty  and  attachment  to  the 
union  of  these  states.  .  .  .  Resolved,  That  in  our  relations 
with  the  Southern  states,  we  will,  as  far  as  in  our  power, 
cheerfully  accord  to  them  what  we  claim  for  ourselves,  the 
free  and  unmolested  exercise  of  our  sovereign  rights  and 
privileges,  and  will  manfully  and  faithfully  aid  them  in  their 
defense  against  unhallowed  and  treasonable  designs  of  any 
combination  of  men.  .  .  .  Resolved,  That  we  hold  in  utter 
disregard  and  contempt  the  cant  and  sneers  of  all  those  dis 
organizing  and  seditious  fanatics  who  go  about  the  streets 
of  our  cities  and  towns,  claiming  to  be  wiser  than  their  fathers 
and  better  than  their  neighbors,  and  hold  mutinous  public 
meetings  and  secret  conclaves,  to  impress  upon  the  unsus 
pecting  and  peaceful  of  our  fellow-citizens  the  dangerous 

1  The  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  I,  p.  311. 


28  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

and  unholy  doctrine  that  he,  who  is  not  an  abolitionist,  is  a 
thief,  a  robber,  and  a  murderer ;  and  we  hold  him  morally 
guilty  of  such  crimes,  who  openly  or  .covertly  endeavors  to 
incite  the  slaves  of  the  South  to  rapine  and  violence,  or 
encourages  fanatical  emissaries  to  go  forth  on  the  errand  of 
promoting  such  an  end.  Resolved,  That  the  late  insurrec 
tionary  movement  of  John  Brown  and  those  who  conspired 
in  person  with  him,  in  his  treasonable  and  murderous  assault 
upon  the  peaceful  citizens  of  Virginia,  has  our  most  un 
qualified  condemnation  and  severest  rebuke,  and  we  consider 
his  punishment  and  that  of  his  confederates  not  only  just 
but  demanded  both  by  the  offended  laws  of  the  country  and 
by  the  magnitude  and  dangerous  tendency  of  the  offense ; 
and  should  a  like  occasion  arise,  we  pledge  ourselves,  if  need 
be,  and  to  the  utmost  of  our  power,  in  person  and  with  our 
fortunes,  to  protect  and  defend  the  constitutional  rights  and 
privileges  of  the  South.  .  .  .  Resolved,  That  while  we 
revere  the  teachings  from  the  pulpits  of  the  free  states,  so 
far  as  they  are  confined  to  the  legitimate  objects  of  church 
organization,  we  consider  all  interferences  from  that  source, 
with  the  constitutional  rights  of  our  Southern  brethren 
touching  the  institution  of  slavery  not  only  entirely  unwar 
ranted  but  calculated  to  incite  disloyal  and  treasonable 
action,  and  to  engender  strife  and  disaffection.  .  .  ."  l 

In  the  opinion  of  these  ultraconservative,  proslavery, 
Northern  Democrats  the  true  causes  and  incentives  of  the 
treasonable  acts  of  Brown  and  other  crazy  adventurers  were 
the  brutal  and  bloody  " irrepressible  conflict"  teachings  of 
William  H.  Seward.  Combating  this  view  was  the  unpalat 
able  doctrine,  set  forth  by  Ex-President  Fillmore  in  a  letter 
to  the  New  York  "  Union  -saving"  meeting  and  for  obvious 
reasons  not  read  there.  This  eminent  statesman  announced 
it  as  his  belief  that  the  Harper's  Ferry  episode  was  the  direct 
result  of  the  Civil  War  in  Kansas,  and  that  the  principle  of 

1  The  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  I,  p.  296. 


JOHN  BROWN  29 

popular  sovereignty,  as  there  applied,  was  the  true  Pandora 
box  to  which  to  trace  the  flood  of  evils  then  threatening  to 
overwhelm  the  constitution  and  sweep  away  the  foundations 
of  the  government ;  few  laws  were  in  his  opinion  so  barren  of 
good  and  so  fruitful  of  evil  as  the  Kansas-Nebraska  Act. 

While  some  of  the  Southern  papers  praised  the  Union 
meetings,  many  at  the  same  time  denounced  them  as  too 
late  and  as  representing  only  the  minority ;  what  the  South 
wanted  of  the  North  was  not  public  meetings,  processions, 
speeches,  and  resolutions,  but  votes.  Mere  "Union-saving" 
by  irresponsible  public  gatherings,  which  could  easily  be 
assembled  in  large  centers  of  population,  was  moreover 
glaringly  inconsistent  with  the  retention  on  the  statute  books 
of  the  formally  enacted  personal  liberty  laws. 

To  the  Republicans  of  the  North  "Union-saving"  was 
even  more  ridiculous  than  to  the  Southerners.  In  the  first 
place,  such  meetings  were  not  new.  They  were  held  after 
the  death  of  President  Taylor,  when  that  President's  ap 
pointees  were  fighting  the  new  President  for  the  promised 
spoils  of  office,  after  the  enactment  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law 
and  its  enforcement,  after  both  the  Kansas-Nebraska  Act 
and  the  assault  on  Senator  Sumner,  and  under  Buchanan 
during  the  struggle  over  the  Leconipton  constitution,  in  each 
case  following  closely  upon  offensive  acts  of  the  government, 
and  plainly  under  the  auspices  of  administration  men,  who 
pushed  them  for  the  purposes  of  shielding  themselves  and 
turning  public  attention  to  other  channels.  It  was  not 
difficult  to  gather  men  into  a  meeting  in  favor  of  a  popular 
idea  (the  nearer  a  truism  the  better),  to  officer  it  with  respect 
able  men  (the  more  neutral  the  better),  to  get  speakers  and 
resolution  writers,  and  having  all  ready,  to  start  the  thing  in 
motion,  then  to  let  the  resolutions  be  for  self-evident  prop 
ositions  which  no  man  disputed.  There  was  nothing  better 
calculated  to  hide  the  actual  situation  than  this  "Union- 
saving"  device;  in  its  declarations,  the  real  cause  of  the 


30  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Brown  uprising,  the  administration  policy  in  Kansas,  was 
always  passed  over. 

The  positive  declarations  of  opinion  by  the  Republicans 
concerning  Brown  and  Harper's  Ferry,  although  purposely 
guarded  in  order  to  save  them  from  the  charge  of  radical 
abolitionism,  were  yet  well  calculated  to  identify  them  with 
moderate  antislavery.  Horace  Greeley,  in  the  New  York 
Tribune,  wrote :  "  There  are  eras  in  which  death  is  not  merely 
heroic  but  beneficent  and  fruitful.  Who  shall  say  that  this 
was  not  John  Brown's  time  to  die  ?  .  .  .  It  will  be  easier 
to  die  in  a  good  cause,  even  on  the  gallows,  since  John  Brown 
has  hallowed  that  mode  of  exit  from  the  troubles  and  tempta 
tions  of  this  mortal  existence.  Then,  as  to  the  '  irrepressible 
conflict,'  who  does  not  see  that  this  sacrifice  must  inevitably 
intensify  its  progress  and  hasten  its  end  ?  .  .  .  So  let  us  be 
reverently  grateful  for  the  privilege  of  living  in  a  world 
rendered  noble  by  the  daring  of  heroes,  the  suffering  of 
martyrs,  among  whom  let  none  doubt  that  history  will  ac 
cord  an  honored  niche  to  old  John  Brown."  William  Cullen 
Bryant,  in  the  New  York  Evening  Post,  wrote :  "  A  large  part 
of  the  civilized  world  will,  as  a  large  part  of  the  world  does 
already,  lay  on  his  tomb  the  honors  of  martyrdom,  and  while 
the  honors  remain  there,  his  memory  will  be  more  terrible  to 
slaveholders  than  his  living  presence  could  ever  have  been, 
because  it  will  bring  recruits  to  his  cause  who  would  never 
have  served  under  his  banner  while  he  was  wielding  carnal 
weapons."  1 

The  New  York  Independent  said  :  "No  man  can  study  the 
demeanor  of  Brown  during  his  trial,  and  read  his  final  speech 
to  the  court,  without  feeling  that  with  all  his  errors  of  judg 
ment  and  his  fatal  mistake  in  the  mode  of  his  attack  upon 
slavery,  this  forlorn  old  man  is  exhibiting  a  type  of  heroism 
which  the  world  has  hardly  seen  since  Cromwell  and  Sydney 

1  These  two  quotations  are  taken  from  the  New  York  Herald,  Decem 
ber  5,  1859. 


JOHN  BROWN  31 

shook  tyrants  with  terror.  .  .  .  He  stands  not  only  as  a 
brave  man  in  a  community  of  cowards,  but  a  moral  hero  and 
prophet."  1  The  New  York  Times  said  :  "  At  the  same  time 
it  cannot  be  doubted  that  Brown's  personal  bearing  through 
out  the  trial,  his  courage,  his  courtesy,  his  perfect  self-pos 
session,  and  his  evident  conviction  of  the  rightfulness  of  his 
acts  have  awakened  a  personal  sympathy  for  him  even  in  the 
hearts  of  those  who  most  detest  his  principles  and  his  con 
duct  ;  ...  it  can  hardly  be  possible  that  any  man  should 
read  the  words  of  the  brave  fanatic  without  a  glow  of  half 
compassionate  admiration.77  2  The  day  following  the  execu 
tion  this  paper  declared  that  thousands  had  sympathy  for 
Brown  who  were  convinced  that  he  should  die. 

That  the  same  sentiments  characterized  the  lesser  Repub 
lican  papers  was  manifested  in  every  part  of  the  country. 
The  Winsted  (Connecticut)  Herald  said,  "For  one  we  con 
fess  that  we  love  him,  we  honor  him,  we  applaud  him."  The 
New  Haven  Journal  and  Courier  declared  that  John  Brown 
was  hung  "because  he  acted  on  the  belief  that  the  Declara 
tion  of  Independence  was  more  than  a  generality."  The 
New  Haven  Palladium  wrote  :  "  John  Brown  had  no  murder, 
no  treason,  in  his  heart.  His  mission  was  one  of  freedom. 
...  He  was  a  good  man  and  a  true  friend  of  his  race,  and 
he  died  a  Christian  death."  The  Norwich  Bulletin:  "John 
Brown  died  a  martyr  to  the  cause;  we  have  said  so  once, 
we  say  so  again."  The  Hartford  Press:  "Slavery  must 
come  down  peacefully,  or  scenes  of  horror  shall  mark  its 
overthrow  in  blood."  3 

The  Republicans,  therefore,  as  well  as  their  radical  and 
conservative  brethren  in  the  North  and  the  radicals  of  the 
South  were  strongly  influenced  by  the  John  Brown  affair. 

1  The  New  York  Independent,  November  10,  1859. 

2  The  New  York  Times,  November  2  and  3,  1859. 

8  The  New  York  Journal  of  Commerce,  March  3,  1860,  contains  these 
quotations  from  the  Connecticut  papers. 


82  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

The  country  was  slowly  recovering  from  the  business  de 
pression  of  1857,  and  the  Kansas  question  and  the  Lecomp- 
ton  constitution  were  rapidly  becoming  matters  of  the  past ; 
the  nation  was  enjoying  more  peace  than  for  many  months 
and  seemed  destined  to  go  into  the  presidential  campaign 
without  any  urgent  and  immediate  question  of  dispute,  when 
suddenly  the  firebrand  of  Harper's  Ferry  flared  forth  and 
kindled  public  sentiment  into  new  life.  This  was  the  in 
fluence  of  John  Brown  on  the  politics  of  the  country.  By 
the  creation  of  sudden  and  intense  excitement,  which  ren 
dered  deliberation  and  moderation  well-nigh  impossible,  he 
forced  the  political  parties  of  the  country  to  assume  extreme 
positions  and  declare  extreme  principles  before  they  were 
prepared  to  do  so ;  and  from  these  positions  and  principles, 
once  assumed  and  declared,  there  could  be  no  receding.  The 
only  change  possible  was  progress  into  more  advanced 
radicalism.  John  Brown  must,  therefore,  bear  the  immediate 
responsibility  for  the  extremes  of  the  presidential  campaign 
of  1860. 


CHAPTER   II 

HELPER'S  IMPENDING  CRISIS  AND  THE  SPEAKERSHIP 
CONTEST 

December  5,  three  days  after  the  execution  of  Brown, 
while  the  country  was  still  under  the  spell  of  the  unusual 
passions  and  excitement  aroused  by  that  dramatic  event, 
the  Thirty-sixth  Congress  of  the  United  States  met  in  its 
first  regular  session.  In  the  House  of  Representatives,  where 
the  first  duty  was  to  effect  organization,  balloting  for  speaker 
began  almost  at  once,  one  hundred  and  seventeen  votes 
being  necessary  to  a  choice.  In  the  first  ballot  Tjpnnp.fr 
of  Virginia,  the  leading  Democratic  candidate,  received 
eighty-six  votes,  Sherman  of  Ohio  and  Grow  of  Pennsylvania, 
the  Republican  candidates,  sixty-six  and  forty-three  votes 
respectively.  When  the  result  of  this  ballot  was  announced, 
Clark  of  Missouri  arose  for  remarks,  and  after  some  confusion, 
incident  to  the  fact  that  in  the  absence  of  a  regular  speaker 
the  temporary  presiding  officer,  the  clerk,  refused  to  decide 
points  of  order  but  insisted  that  the  House  should  decide 
for  itself,  he  introduced  the  following  resolution  :  "IJTigr&cw, 
certain  members  of  .Jim  Hnns^_now  in__nomination  for 
speaker,  did  jndorse_the  book  hereinafter  mentioned,  Resolved, 
That^  the  doctrines  jmd  sentiments  of  a  certain  book,  called 
The  Impending  Crisis  in  the  South,  How  to  meei~TT, 

hnst.ilp    tp    f.frp    pp.fl.np.fl.nd 


of  the  country,  and  that  no  member  of  this  Hnnsfi,  who 
indorsed  andrecommended  itr  is  fit  to  be  speaker  of  the 
House."^ 
In  this  way  an  antislavery  book,  written  by  a  poor  white 

D  33 


34  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

of  North  Carolina,  was  suddenly  raised  into  national  promi 
nence  ;  it  had  first  appeared  in  1857  without  attracting  atten 
tion,  had  later  been  severely  castigated  in  the  Senate  of  the 
United  States  without  widespread  comment,  and  with  the 
indorsement  of  sixty-eight  Republican  Congressmen,  in 
cluding  both  Sherman  and  Grow,  and  leading  Republican 
editors,  had  been  used  as  a  campaign  document  in  the  fall 
campaign  of  1859.  The  prevailing  excitement  now  lent  it 
new  significance.  In  the  week  of  the  death  of  Brown  the 
book  had  been  resurrected  and  laid  before  the  country  in 
large  extracts  in  the  columns  of  the  New  York  Herald.  Hope 
was  kindled  again  in  the  hearts  of  the  Democrats,  who  had 
been  badly  beaten  in  the  previous  fall  elections,  losing  even 
Pennsylvania,  their  old  stronghold ;  combined  with  the 
Virginia  raid,  the  new^bookjnight  arouse  such  a  conservative 
reaction  as  to  completely  rejuvenate  the  party.  Thus 
buoyed  anew,  the  administration  party  girded  itself  for  one 
of  the  most  bitter  parliamentary  struggles  in  the  history  of  the 
national  House. 

The  book  itself,  whose  author,  Hinton  Rowan  Helper,  was 
but  twenty-seven  years  of  age,  indeed  proved  "  insurrection 
ary  and  hostile  to  the  domestic  peace  and  tranquillity  of  the 
country."  Its  outline  was  simple.  It  opened  with  a  compar 
ison  of  the  free  and  slave  states,  altogether  to  the  advantage 
of  the  former.  When  the  first  census  was  taken  in  1790, 
New  York  had  a  population  of  340,120,  Virginia  twice  that 
number  or  748,308;  sixty  years  later  New  York  had  3,097,- 
394,  Virginia  1,421,661.  In  1791  the  exports  of  New  York 
equaled  $2,505,465  and  those  of  Virginia  $3,130,865,  but 
in  1852  those  of  New  York  amounted  to  $87,484,450  and 
those  of  Virginia  to  $2,724,657 ;  although  in  1790  the  im 
ports  of  the  two  states  were  about  equal,  in  1853  those  of  the 
Northern  state  were  $178,270,999  and  of  the  Southern  state 
only  $399,000.  The  products  of  mining,  manufacturing, 
and  the  mechanic  arts  in  the  one  case  were  valued  in  1850  at 


THE  SPEAKERSHIP  CONTEST  35 

$237,597,249,  in  the  other  at  $29,705,387 ;  in  the  same  year 
the  real  and  personal  property  in  Virginia,  excluding  slaves, 
exceeded  $390,000,000 ;  in  New  York,  where  there  were  no 
slaves,  $1,080,000,000.  New  York  City  was  worth  more 
than  the  whole  state  of  Virginia.  In  1790  North  Carolina 
had  393,000  people,  15,000  more  than  Massachusetts ;  in  1850 
Massachusetts,  with  994,000,  was  125,000  ahead.  The 
exports  and  imports  of  the  New  England  state  in  1853 
were  valued  at  $58,000,000,  while  those  of  North  Carolina 
were  so  small  as  to  be  unworthy  of  record ;  products  of  min 
ing,  manufacturing,  and  the  mechanic  arts  in  the  one  instance 
reached  $150,000,000,  in  the  other  $9,000,000.  Boston  alone 
could  almost  buy  North  Carolina,  while  in  the  whole  state  of 
Massachusetts,  with  no  slaves,  real  and  personal  property 
was  valued  at  $570,000,000,  and  in  North  Carolina,  with 
slaves,  at  only  $266,000,000.  In  1760  the  one  city  of  Charles 
ton,  South  Carolina,  imported  $2,600,000  worth  of  articles, 
and  in  1855  only  $1,750,000  worth ;  Philadelphia,  in  1854, 
$21,000,000  worth.  The  products  of  mining,  manufacturing, 
and  the  mechanic  arts  in  Pennsylvania  in  1850  totalled 
$155,000,000,  in  South  Carolina  $7,000,000 ;  the  cash  value 
of  Pennsylvania's  farms  was  $422,000,000,  of  those  in  South 
Carolina  $86,000,000 ;  and  the  real  and  personal  property  in 
Pennsylvania,  with  no  slaves,  was  put  at  $729,000,000 ;  in 
South  Carolina,  with  384,000  slaves,  at  $288,000,000.  Penn 
sylvania  spent  $1,348,000  on  her  schools,  possessed  393  li 
braries  other  than  private,  and  310  newspapers  and  periodi 
cals,  of  which  84,898,672  copies  circulated ;  whereas  South 
Carolina  expended  on  her  schools  $200,000,  had  26  libraries, 
and  46  newspapers  and  periodicals  with  7,145,930  copies  in 
circulation.  Many  other  details  were  given.  Incontro 
vertible  facts  afforded  ample  evidence  that  something 
was  wrong  with  the  South,  racially,  politically,  and  morally ; 
else  how  had  the  North  so  far  outstripped  her  ? 
It  was  well  known  to  Southerners  that  they  were  compelled 


36  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

to  go  North  for  almost  everything  of  utility  and  adornment, 
from  watches,  shoe  pegs,  and  paintings  to  cotton  mills,  steam 
ships,  and  statuary ;  there  was  no  foreign  trade  in  the  South, 
no  princely  Southern  merchants.  "And  now  to  the  point. 
In  our  opinion  —  an  opinion  which  has  been  formed  from 
data  obtained  by  assiduous  researches  and  comparisons,  from 
laborious  investigation,  logical  reasoning,  and  earnest  reflec 
tion  —  the  causes  which  have  impeded  the  progress  and  pros 
perity  of  the  South,  which  have  dwindled  our  commerce  and 
other  similar  pursuits  into  the  most  contemptible  insignifi 
cance  ;  sunk  a  large  majority  of  our  people  into  galling  pov 
erty  and  ignorance,  rendered  a  small  minority  conceited  and 
tyrannical,  and  driven  the  rest  away  from  their  homes ;  en 
tailed  upon  us  a  humiliating  dependence  on  the  free  states ; 
disgraced  us  in  the  recesses  of  our  own  souls,  and  brought  us 
under  reproach  in  the  eyes  of  all  enlightened  and  civilized 
nations,  may  be  traced  to  one  common  source,  and  there 
find  solution  in  the  most  hateful  and  horrible  word  that  was 
ever  incorporated  into  the  vocabulary  of  human  economy  — 
slavery."  It  was  the  first  and  most  sacred  duty  of  every 
Southerner,  without  evasion  or  compromise,  to  declare  him 
self  an  unqualified  abolitionist ;  the  only  thing  to  save  the 
South  from  the  vortex  of  utter  ruin  was  complete  abolition. 
There  must  be  no  more  yielding  to  the  domination  of  the  in 
flated  oligarchy. 

Away  with  the  agricultural  boasts  of  the  South.  Com 
paring  agricultural  records  the  author  found  that  there  was  a 
balance  of  $44,000,000  in  favor  of  the  North ;  the  one  North 
ern  crop  of  hay  was  worth  more  than  the  cotton,  tobacco,  rice, 
hay,  and  hemp  of  all  the  Southern  states.  Moreover,  the 
North  secured  more  profit  even  from  Southern  agriculture 
than  did  the  South  herself,  for  the  cotton  was  carried  to  its 
destination  in  the  ships  of  the  Northerners,  spun  in  their  fac 
tories,  woven  in  their  looms,  insured  in  their  offices,  and  re 
turned  again  South  in  their  ships. 


THE  SPEAKERSHIP  CONTEST  37 

The  soil  under  slave  culture  sickened  and  died.  Said  C.  C. 
Clay  of  Alabama :  "I  can  show  you  with  sorrow  in  the  older 
portions  of  Alabama  the  sad  memorials  of  the  artless  and  ex 
hausting  culture  of  cotton.  Our  small  planters,  after  taking 
the  cream  off  their  lands,  unable  to  restore  them  by  rest, 
manures,  and  otherwise,  are  going  West  and  South,  in  search 
of  other  virgin  lands,  which  they  may  and  will  despoil  in  like 
manner.  Our  wealthier  planters  with  greater  means,  and  no 
more  skill,  are  buying  out  their  poorer  neighbors,  extending 
their  plantations,  and  adding  to  their  slave  force.  The 
wealthy  few,  who  are  able  to  live  on  smaller  profits,  and  to 
give  their  blasted  fields  some  rest,  are  thus  pushing  off  the 
many."  The  author  then  quoted  from  an  address  by  Henry 
A.  Wise  to  Virginians  :  "  Commerce  has  long  ago  spread  her 
sails  and  sailed  away  from  you.  You  have  not  as  yet  dug 
more  than  coal  enough  to  warm  yourselves  at  your  own 
hearths ;  you  have  set  no  tilt  hammers  to  strike  blows  worthy 
of  Gods  in  your  iron  foundries ;  you  have  not  yet  spun  more 
than  coarse  cotton  enough  in  the  way  of  manufactures,  to 
clothe  your  own  slaves.  You  have  no  commerce,  no  mining, 
no  manufactures.  You  have  relied  alone  on  the  single  power 
of  agriculture,  and  such  agriculture!  Your  sedge  patches  out 
shine  the  sun.  Your  inattention  to  your  only  source  of 
wealth  has  seared  the  very  bosom  of  Mother  Earth.  Instead 
of  having  to  feed  cattle  on  a  thousand  hills,  you  have  had  to 
chase  the  stumped-tailed  steer  through  the  sedge  patches 
to  procure  a  tough  beefsteak." 

Definite  recommendations  followed  as  to  how  to  get  rid 
of  slavery.  First,  thorough  political  organization  and  inde 
pendent  political  action  on  the  part  of  the  nonslaveholding 
whites  of  the  South;  second,  ineligibility  of  slaveholders 
to  membership  in  the  organization  —  never  another  vote 
to  any  one  who  advocated  the  retention  and  perpetuation 
of  human  slavery;  third,  no  cooperation  with  proslavery 
politicians,  no  fellowship  with  them  in  religion,  no  affilia- 


38  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

tion  with  them  in  society;  fourth,  no  patronage  to  pro- 
slavery  merchants,  no  guestship  in  slave-waiting  hotels, 
no  fees  to  proslavery  lawyers,  no  employment  of  proslavery 
physicians,  no  audience  to  proslavery  parsons;  fifth,  no 
more  hiring  of  slaves  by  nonslaveholders ;  sixth,  abrupt  dis 
continuance  of  subscription  to  proslavery  newspapers; 
seventh,  the  greatest  possible  encouragement  to  free  white 
labor ;  eighth,  immediate  death  to  slavery,  or  if  no  im 
mediate,  then  unqualified  proscription  of  its  advocates  dur 
ing  the  period  of  its  existence ;  ninth,  a  tax  of  sixty  dollars 
on  every  slaveholder  for  each  and  every  negro  in  his  posses 
sion  at  the  present  time  or  at  any  time  between  now  and 
July  4,  1863 ;  tenth,  an  additional  tax  of  forty  dollars  per 
annum  to  be  levied  annually  on  every  slaveholder  for  each 
and  every  negro  found  in  his  possession  after  July  4, 1863. 

"This,  then,  is  the  outline  of  our  scheme  for  the  abolition 
of  slavery  in  the  Southern  states.  Let  it  be  acted  upon  with 
due  promptitude  and  as  certain  as  truth  is  mightier  than 
error,  fifteen  years  will  not  elapse  before  every  foot  of  terri 
tory,  from  the  mouth  of  the  Delaware  to  the  emboguing  of 
the  Rio  Grande,  will  glitter  with  jewels  of  freedom.  .  .  . 
But,  sirs,  slaveholders,  chevaliers,  and  lords  of  the  lash,  we 
are  unwilling  to  allow  you  to  cheat  the  negroes  out  of  all  the 
rights  and  claims  to  which,  as  human  beings,  they  are  most 
sacredly  entitled.  Not  alone  for  ourselves  as  individuals, 
but  for  others  also,  particularly  for  five  or  six  million  of  non- 
slaveholding  whites,  whom  your  iniquitous  statism  has  de 
barred  from  almost  all  the  mental  and  material  comforts 
of  life,  do  we  speak,  when  we  say,  you  must  sooner  or  later 
emancipate  your  slaves,  and  pay  each  and  every  one  of  them 
at  least  sixty  dollars  cash  in  hand.  By  doing  this  you  will 
be  restoring  to  them  their  natural  rights  and  remunerating 
them  at  the  rate  of  less  than  twenty-six  cents  per  annum 
for  the  long  and  cheerless  period  of  their  servitude,  from  the 
20th  of  August,  1620,  when  on  the  James  River  in  Vir- 


THE  SPEAKERSHIP  CONTEST  39 

ginia,  they  became  the  unhappy  slaves  of  unhappy  tyrants. 
Moreover,  by  doing  this  you  will  be  performing  but  a 
simple  act  of  justice  to  the  nonslaveholding  whites,  upon 
whom  the  system  of  slavery  has  weighed  scarcely  less  heavily 
than  upon  the  negroes  themselves.  You  will  also  be  apply 
ing  a  saving  balm  to  your  own  outraged  hearts  and  con 
sciences,  and  your  children,  yourself  in  fact,  freed  from  the 
accursed  stain  of  slavery,  will  become  respectable,  useful, 
and  honorable  members  of  society."  Finally  the  author 
taunted  and  defied  the  slaveholders  as  follows :  "  And  now, 
sirs,  we  have  thus  laid  down  our  ultimatum.  What  are  you 
going  to  do  about  it  ?  Something  dreadful,  of  course ! 
Perhaps  you  will  dissolve  the  Union  again.  Do  it,  if  you 
dare  !  Our  motto,  and  we  would  have  you  to  understand  it, 
is  '  the  abolition  of  slavery  and  the  perpetuation  of  the  Amer 
ican  Union.'  If  by  any  means  you  do  succeed  in  your  trea 
sonable  attempts  to  take  the  South  out  of  the  Union  to-day, 
we  will  bring  her  back  to-morrow;  if  she  goes  away  with 
you,  she  will  return  without  you.  Do  not  mistake  the 
meaning  of  the  last  clause  of  the  last  sentence.  We  could 
elucidate  it  so  thoroughly  that  no  intelligent  person  could 
fail  to  comprehend  it ;  but  for  reasons,  which  may  hereafter 
appear,  we  forego  the  task.  Henceforth  there  are  other 
interests  to  be  consulted  in  the  South,  aside  from  the  interests 
of  negroes  and  slaveholders.  A  profound  sense  of  duty  in 
cites  us  to  make  the  greatest  possible  efforts  for  the  abolition 
of  slavery;  an  equally  profound  sense  of  duty  calls  for  a 
continuation  of  those  efforts  until  the  very  last  foe  to  free 
dom  shall  have  been  utterly  vanquished.  .  .  .  Thus, 
terror  engender ers  of  the  South,  have  we  fully  and  frankly 
defined  our  position ;  we  have  no  modifications  to  propose, 
no  compromises  to  offer,  nothing  to  retract.  Frown,  sirs, 
fret,  foam,  prepare  your  weapons,  threat,  strike,  shoot,  stab, 
bring  on  civil  war,  dissolve  the  Union,  nay,  annihilate  the 
solar  system  if  you  will,  do  all  this,  more,  less,  better  less, 


40  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

tfft 

anything  —  do  what  you  will,  sirs,  you  can  neither  foil  or 
intimidate  us ;  our  purpose  is  as  firmly  fixed  as  the  eternal 
pillars  of  heaven;  we  have  determined  to  abolish  slavery, 
and  so  help  us  God,  abolish  it  we  will !" 

The  author  then  gave  an  elaborate  set  of  quotations  to 
^prove  that  the  Southern  statesmen  quite  generally  in  the 
early  days  of  the  republic,  Northern  statesmen  of  all  times, 
and  leaders  of  all  civilized  nations  from  antiquity  to  modern 
times,  were  arrayed  against  slavery;  the  testimony  of  the 
churches  and  of  the  Bible  was  likewise  against  it.  Washing 
ton  wrote,  "I  never  mean,  unless  some  particular  set  of 
circumstances  should  compel  me  to  it,  to  possess  another 
slave  by  purchase,  it  being  among  my  first  wishes  to  see  some 
plan  adopted  by  which  slavery  in  this  country  may  be  abol 
ished  by  law."  Jefferson  proposed  a  plan  of  emancipation, 
and  added:  "Indeed,  I  tremble  for  my  country  when  I 
reflect  that  God  is  just ;  that  his  justice  cannot  sleep  forever  ; 
that  considering  numbers,  nature,  and  natural  means  only, 
a  revolution  of  the  wheel  of  fortune,  an  exchange  of  situation, 
is  among  possible  events ;  that  it  may  become  probable  by 
supernatural  influence !  The  Almighty  has  no  attributes 
that  can  take  sides  with  us  in  such  a  contest."  Madison  and 
Monroe  were  opposed  to  slavery.  Patrick  Henry  wrote, 
"It  would  rejoice  my  very  soul  that  every  one  of  my  fellow- 
beings  were  emancipated."  Henry  Clay  said,  "So  long 
as  God  allows  the  vital  current  to  flow  through  my  veins,  I 
will  never,  never,  never,  by  word  or  thought,  by  mind  or  will, 
aid  in  admitting  one  rod  of  free  territory  to  the  everlasting 
curse  of  human  bondage."  l 

1  The  book  closes  with  further  facts  and  figures  in  comparison  of  the 
two  sections.  The  North,  with  780,576  hands,  turned  out  $842,586,058 
worth  of  manufactured  product;  the  South,  with  161,733  hands, 
$165,413,027  worth.  The  one  group  of  states  had  3682  miles  of  canals. 
17,855  miles  of  railroads,  a  bank  capital  of  $230,100,340,  and  a  militia 
force  of  1,381,843,  while  the  other  had  1116  miles  of  canals,  6859  miles  of 
railroads,  $102,078,940  bank  capital,  and  a  militia  force  of  792,876.  The 


THE  SPEAKERSHIP  CONTEST  41 

In  the  eyes  of  slaveholders  such  a  book,  containing  such 
advice,  was  rebellion,  and  the  men  who  gave  it  their  indorse 
ment,  understanding  the  scope  and  purpose  of  their  act, 
deserved  a  nameless  fate.  Republicans  in  the  House, 
forced  by  Clark's  motion  to  take  the  defensive,  although 
they  mildly  admitted  their  circulation  of  the  despised  book 
as  party  literature,  indulged  but  little  in  direct  attacks  on 
the  South,  whereas,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Southerners  were 
aggressive  in  the  extreme.  A  part  of  almost  every  day  the 
House  devoted  to  a  fruitless  ballot  or  two  for  speaker,  the 
remainder  of  the  time  to  the  speeches  of  the  mob.  For  it 
was  a  great  unruly  mob  over  which  by  circumstances  the 
clerk  was  forced  to  preside.  Members  were  seated  on  wooden 
benches,  arranged  in  a  semicircle  around  the  speaker's 
desk ;  a  wide  central  aisle,  with  the  Republican  benches  on 
the  one  side  and  the  Democratic  on  the  other,  like  an  arena, 
seemed  to  invite  the  hostile  camps  to  combat.  Despite  num 
berless  challenges  to  come  forth  and  state  and  defend  his 
opinion  of  Helperism,  Sherman,  who  was  the  leading  Repub 
lican  candidate  after  the  first  ballot,  as  often  refused  so  long 
as  the  Democrats  refused  to  withdraw  the  offensive  resolution. 
Points  of  order  were  discussed,  questions  of  procedure  pro 
pounded  ;  the  whole  range  of  Republican  and  Democratic 
policy  was  now  run  over,  now  the  possibilities  of  the  coming 
presidential  campaign  weighed  in  the  balance.  The  facts 
and  figures  of  the  Crisis  the  Southerners  could  not  dis 
pute,  and  they  wisely  never  attempted  to  do  so,  but  they 
raged  and  threatened.  Said  Pry  or  of  Virginia,  "We  have 

one  section  had  62,433  public  schools,  72,621  teachers,  and  2,169,901 
school  children,  the  other  18,507  schools,  19,307  teachers,  and  581,861 
school  children;  there  were  in  the  one  section  14,911  libraries  other  than 
private,  with  3,888,234  volumes,  in  the  other  695  libraries  with  649,577 
volumes ;  in  the  North  1790  newspapers  and  periodicals  with  334,146,281 
copies  circulated,  and  in  the  South  704  newspapers  and  periodicals  with 
81,038,693  copies  circulated;  Northerners  in  the  one  year  took  out  1929 
patents,  Southerners  268. 


42  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

threatened  and  resolved,  and  resolved  and  threatened,  and 
backed  out  from  our  threats,  until,  so  help  me  God  !  I  will 
never  utter  another  threat  or  another  resolution;  but  as 
the  stroke  follows  the  lightning's  flash,  so,  with  me,  acts 
shall  be  coincident  and  commensurate  with  words."  Curry 
of  Alabama,  "I  am  not  ashamed  or  afraid  publicly  to  avow 
that  the  election  of  William  H.  Seward  or  Salmon  P.  Chase, 
or  any  other  representative  of  the  Republican  party,  upon 
a  sectional  platform,  ought  to  be  resisted  to  the  disruption  of 
every  tie  that  binds  this  confederation  together."  Crawford 
of  Georgia  :  "Now,  in  regard  to  the  election  of  a  Black  Re 
publican  President,  I  have  this  to  say,  and  I  speak  the  senti 
ment  of  every  Democrat  on  this  floor  from  the  state  of 
Georgia,  we  will  never  submit  to  the  inauguration  of  a 
Black  Republican  President.  (Applause  from  the  Democratic 
benches  and  hisses  from  the  Republicans.)  I  repeat  it,  sir  ;  and 
I  have  authority  to  say  so  ;  no  Democratic  representative  from 
Georgia  on  this  floor  will  ever  submit  to  the  inauguration 
of  a  Black  Republican  President.  (Renewed  hisses  and 
applause.)  "  Singleton  of  Mississippi,  "If  you  desire  to  know 
my  counsel  to  the  people  of  Mississippi,  it  is,  that  they  take 
measures  immediately  in  conjunction  with  the  other  Southern 
states,  to  separate  from  you."  Gartrell  of  Georgia,  "I 
shall  announce  the  solemn  fact,  disagreeable  though  it  may 
be  to  you  as  well  as  to  me,  to  my  people  as  well  as  to  yours, 
that  if  this  course  of  aggression  shall  be  continued,  the  people 
of  the  South,  of  the  slaveholding  states,  will  be  compelled 
by  every  principle  of  justice,  honor,  and  self-preservation, 
to  disrupt  every  tie  that  binds  them  to  the  Union,  peace 
fully  if  they  can,  forcibly  if  they  must."  1 

On  some  occasions  passion  went  beyond  the  bounds  of 
parliamentary  order.     In  a  rough-and-tumble  fight  one  day, 


Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  840-841,  gives 
these  and  other  threats.  See  the  same,  Vol.  IV,  App.,  p.  53,  for  an  angry 
encounter  between  Kilgore  of  the  North  and  Singleton  of  the  South. 


THE  SPEAKERSHIP  CONTEST  43 

amid  intense  excitement,  a  pistol  fell  from  the  pocket  of  a 
member  from  New  York.  Early  in  the  session  Branch  of 
North  Carolina  challenged  Grow  of  Pennsylvania  to  a  duel, 
which  the  latter  promptly  refused.  At  another  time  Logan 
of  Illinois  drew  a  pistol  on  a  colleague.  "By  God,  if  I  can't 
talk,  I  can  do  something  else,"  he  exclaimed.  Yet  mutual 
good  will  was  not  lacking ;  inflammatory  speeches  and  angry 
encounters  on  the  floor  were  usually  over  in  a  few  minutes, 
and  gave  place  to  good  feeling,  to  chatting,  smoking,  and 
drinking  in  mutual  good-fellowship.  Even  Sherman,  arch- 
traitor,  denounced  as  unfit  to  live  and  as  unfit  to  die,  after 
all  was  over  might  be  seen  walking  off,  arm  in  arm,  with 
his  castigators. 

The  responsibility  for  the  failure  to  elect  the  speaker  wras 
justly  laid  to  the  door  of  the  two  small  parties  or  factions, 
the  Anti-Lecompton  Democrats  and  the  Americans,  who 
steadfastly  refused  to  vote  for  Sherman  or  to  allow  the 
adoption  of  the  plurality  rule  for  the  election.  The  substitu 
tion  of  a  rule  of  this  kind  in  place  of  a  majority  vote  had  been 
the  only  means  of  ending  the  struggle  of  1849  in  the  House 
with  the  election  of  Howell  Cobb  of  Georgia  on  the  sixty- 
second  ballot,  and  that  of  1856  with  the  election  of  Banks  of 
Massachusetts  on  the  one  hundred  and  thirty-third  ballot; 
and  in  the  minds  of  the  Republicans,  who  easily  commanded 
the  highest  vote,  such  a  rule  was  now  desirable. 

Finally  patronage,  "the  cohesive  power  of  public  plunder," 
accomplished  the  work.  After  the  contest  had  dragged  itself 
out  for  two  months,  continuing  uninterruptedly  through 
the  Christmas  holidays,1  the  Republicans  gave  up  the  radi 
cal  Sherman  and  threw  their  votes  to  Pennington,  a  member 
of  the  People's  Party  of  New  Jersey,  who  had  uniformly 
voted  for  Sherman,  but  had  not  signed  the  offensive  indorse 
ment  of  the  Helper  book  because  he  was  not  a  member  of 
the  House  when  that  indorsement  had  appeared ;  the  Anti- 
1  Christmas  and  New  Year's  came  on  Sunday  this  year. 


44  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

M 

Lecompton  Democrats  and  the  Americans  gave  the  new 
candidate  the  three  or  four  votes  that  Sherman  had  always 
lacked  and  thus  an  election  was  accomplished.  An  Anti- 
Lecomptonite  was  made  clerk,  an  American  sergeant  at  arms, 
and  together  the  two  small  parties  divided  several  important 
committee  assignments.1 

The  new  speaker,  sixty-three  years  of  age  and  of  a  dis 
tinguished  New  Jersey  family,  was  a  graduate  of  Princeton 
College  and  by  profession  a  lawyer ;  for  seven  years  he  had 
served  his  state  with  distinction  as  governor,  in  which 
position  he  had  achieved  a  national  reputation  as  an  anti- 
slavery  man.  He  had  refused  the  governorship  of  the  terri 
tory  of  Minnesota  proffered  him  by  President  Taylor,  and 
later  an  appointment  as  judge  to  settle  claims  with  Mexico. 
Elected  to  Congress  by  the  People's  Party,  or  as  it  was 
sometimes  called,  the  Opposition,  his  new  honor,  conferred 
by  Republican  votes,  was  calculated  to  facilitate  the  merging 
of  his  party  into  the  larger  opposition  or  Republican  party 
both  in  New  Jersey  and  hi  the  neighboring  state  of  Penn 
sylvania.  Along  with  Muhlenburg,  the  first  speaker,  and 
Henry  Clay,  Pennington  enjoyed  the  distinction  of  elevation 
to  the  speakership  at  the  beginning  of  his  first  term  as  mem- 

1  In  the  long  interval  covering  December  and  January  the  members  of 
the  House  could  receive  no  salary  from  the  government  as  they  had  not 
been  sworn  in  and  there  was  also  no  speaker  to  sign  the  salary  warrants. 
In  the  contingency  the  former  sergeant  at  arms,  active  candidate  for  re 
election,  privately  borrowed  money  and  advanced  it  regularly  to  the 
members  in  easy  loans,  in  the  hope  that  thus  he  could  win  the  post  again ; 
but  he  had  his  pains  for  nothing,  as  the  office  went  to  another.  It  was 
suggested  at  the  time,  that  inasmuch  as  there  was  no  speaker  to  swear  the 
members  in,  an  ordinary  justice  be  secured  to  perform  the  task;  the 
speaker  was  not  necessary  to  this  function.  Pennington  announced  his 
committees  almost  at  once ;  Sherman  had  had  these  made  up  for  a  long 
time,  and  the  successful  candidate  adopted  these  assignments  as  his  own. 
Probably  he  had  to  promise  to  do  this  in  order  to  secure  the  Republican 
vote.  Here,  then,  was  an  instance  in  which  the  speaker  practically  did 
not  select  his  own  committees  but  allowed  a  party  to  dictate  the  choices 
to  him. 


THE  SPEAKERSHIP  CONTEST  45 

ber  of  the  House ;  as  a  new  man  he  had  no  record  and  was 
not  yet  definitely  a  member  of  any  faction,  and  thus  his 
name  was  a  good  one  to  win  support  from  various  groups.1 
Tall  and  stately,  courteous  and  affable,  he  was  yet  without 
practical  legislative  experience,  and  proved  a  poor  speaker, 
entirely  dependent  upon  accommodating  members  and 
intelligent  pages.2 

The  effect  on  the  country  of  this  long  contest  was  intense. 
Every  phase  of  the  two  months7  battle,  every  excoriation  of 
Helperism,  every  bit  of  Southern  bluster,  every  Northern 
argument  and  expostulation,  every  physical  clash,  was 
eagerly  read  about  the  next  morning  by  hundreds  of  thou 
sands.  Numerous  Northern  cities  greeted  the  election 
of  Pennington  with  the  firing  of  one  hundred  guns,  while  the 
Richmond  papers  draped  themselves  in  mourning.  North 
ern  bookstores  and  news  stands  sold  one  hundred  and  fifty 
thousand  copies  of  the  incendiary  Crisis,  the  popularity 
of  which  recalled  Uncle  Tom's  Cabin.  In  the  South  the 
dreaded  book  was  suppressed  and  supporters  of  it  persecuted 
after  the  fashion  of  John  Brown's  sympathizers.  So  intent 
were  Southerners  on  keeping  the  incendiary  sentiments  from 
the  common  people  and  from  the  negroes  that  they  made 
practically  no  mention  of  Helper  and  his  book  in  their  local 
press.  An  exclusive  boat  club  in  Washington,  D.C.,  re 
quested  the  withdrawal  of  a  member  who  indorsed  Helper. 

1  This  principle  was  to  receive  application  later  in  the    selection   of 
Lincoln  as  the  party's  candidate  for  the  presidency.     See  p.  127. 

2  He  was  defeated  for  reelection  to  the  House,  November,  1860.     In 
a  campaign  speech  in  the  fall,  Pennington  declared  that  he  knew  several 
weeks  before  his  election  to  the  speakership  that  sufficient  votes  to  elect 
him  could  be  obtained  at  any  time ;   the  Republicans,  however,  coveted 
the  moral  influence  of  the  victory  and  clung  to  Sherman  as  long  as  possible. 
The    New  York    Tribune,  February  18,  1860,  gives  an  account    of    the 
courteous  reception  by  Pennington,  while  he  was  governor  of  New  Jersey, 
of  a  communication   from  a  world    antislavery  convention  in  London, 
praying  for  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  America.     The  Southern  governors 
spurned  the  circular. 


46  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Mfe 

In  a  bill  regulating  the  Police  Commissioners  of  Baltimore, 
Maryland,  the  state  legislature  inserted  the  following  clause, 
"Provided  that  no  Black  Republican  or  indorser  or  supporter 
of  the  Helper  book  shall  be  appointed  to  office  under  the  said 
Board";  that  is,  no  Helperite  could  be  a  policeman.  In 
the  charter  of  a  street  railway  for  the  same  city  there  was 
this  clause,  "  That  no  Black  Republican  or  indorser  or  sup 
porter  of  the  Helper  book  shall  receive  any  of  the  benefits 
or  privileges  of  this  act  or  be  employed  in  any  capacity  by 
the  said  railroad  company";  that  is,  no  Helperite  could 
ride  in  the  street  cars.  This  was  the  same  legislature  that 
censured  the  American,  Henry  Winter  Davis,  member  of 
Congress  from  Baltimore,  for  throwing  his  vote  to  Penning- 
ton.  In  the  town  square  at  High  Point,  North  Carolina, 
ten  copies  of  the  Crisis  were  publicly  burned.  A  farmer 
of  Alexandria  County,  Virginia,  was  arrested  for  buying 
four  copies  of  the  book,  and  thrust  into  jail  under  bonds  of 
$2000.  Rev.  Daniel  Worth,  a  missionary  of  the  American 
Missionary  Association,  was  arrested  at  Greensboro,  North 
Carolina,  for  selling  the  hated  book  and  in  default  of  $15,000 
bail  was  allowed  to  languish  some  three  months  in  jail. 
At  the  trial  four  copies  of  Helper  were  produced,  which  it 
was  proved  that  Worth  had  sold.  One  buyer,  learning  of 
Worth's  arrest,  buried  his  copy ;  another  hid  his  in  a  hollow 
log ;  another  testified  that  Worth  on  selling  a  copy  to  him, 
told  him  to  be  careful  whom  he  allowed  to  see  it.  A  sen 
tence  of  one  year  in  prison  followed.  Tried  again  on  the 
same  charge,  Worth  was  convicted  but  immediately  released 
on  bail,  and  finally  escaped  to  New  York,  where  both  he  and 
Helper  addressed  large  popular  audiences  in  the  interests  of 
their  cause.  The  story  of  Worth's  persecution  was  a  favor 
ite  one  in  the  Northern  papers. 


CHAPTER   III 

ANTISLAVERY   IN   THE   HOUSE   AND   SENATE 

A  FTER  the  final  organization  of  the  House  the  record 
-"•  of  Congress  was  much  less  that  of  a  legislative  body 
than  of  a  great  factory  for  the  manufacture  of  public  opinion ; 
speeches  were  made  and  things  were  done  for  home  consump-  * 
tion,  to  influence  voters.  Probably  more  than  at  present 
the  people  were  influenced  by  Congress,  just  as  the  frequent 
congressional  clashes  were  themselves  in  turn  but  a  reflec 
tion  of  the  known  attitude  of  the  home  communities.  There 
was  formal  discussion  of  the  tariff,  polygamy,  the  Pacific 
Railroad,  the  Homestead  Act,  and  a  few  other  acts  of  general 
public  policy,  but  the  one  unfailing  topic,  to  which  all  others 
inevitably  led,  was  the  sectional  question  of  slavery. 

In  the  House  perhaps  the  most  famous  speech  on  either 
side  of  this  question,  and  certainly  the  most  famous  Repub 
lican  utterance  there  on  the  subject,  was  that  of  Owen  Love- 
joy  of  Illinois.  The  speech  should  be  read  in  its  entirety,  for 
no  adequate  idea  of  it  can  be  gained  from  mere  description 
or  quotation.  The  subject  was  the  extermination,  so  far 
as  the  federal  government  had  power,  of  the  "twin  relics  of 
barbarism,"  polygamy  and  slavery,  to  which  policy  the  Re 
publican  party  pledged  itself  in  its  platform  of  1856.  The 
deathblow  had  already  been  dealt  the  former,  so  that  the 
speaker  would  consider  slavery  alone.  After  some  technical 
objections  to  his  speaking,  he  proceeded  as  follows:  "We 
are  told  that  where  slavery  will  pay,  slaveholders  will  go. 
Precisely  upon  the  same  principle  we  might  say  that  where 

47 


48  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

^ 

robbery  will  pay,  robbery  will  go;  where  piracy  will  pay, 
piracy  will  go;  and  where  adipose  human  flesh  is  cheaper 
than  that  of  beeves,  cannibalism  will  go,  because  it  will  pay. 
Sir,  than  robbery,  than  piracy,  than  polygamy,  slaveholding 
is  worse,  more  criminal,  more  injurious  to  man,  and  con 
sequently  more  offensive  to  God.  Slaveholding  has  been 
justly  designated  as  the  sum  of  all  villainy.  Put  every  crime 
perpetrated  among  men  into  a  moral  crucible,  and  dissolve 
and  combine  them  all,  and  the  resultant  amalgam  is  slave- 
holding.  It  has  the  violence  of  robbery.  A  Member. 
You  are  joking.  Mr  Lovejoy.  No,  sir,  I  am  speaking  in 
dead  earnest.  It  has  the  violence  of  robbery,  the  blood  and 
cruelty  of  piracy;  it  has  the  offensive  and  brutal  lusts  of 
polygamy,  all  combined  and  concentrated  in  itself,  with 
aggravations  that  neither  one  of  these  crimes  ever  knew  or 
dreamed  of." 

The  justification  of  slavery,  so  far  as  he  knew,  rested  on 
three  grounds,  the  infirmity  of  the  enslaved  race,  the  civiliz 
ing  and  christianizing  influences  of  slavery,  and  the  guaran 
tees  of  the  federal  constitution.  As  to  the  first  point : 
"We  may  concede  it  as  a  matter  of  fact  that  it  (the  negro 
race)  is  infirm ;  but  does  it  follow,  therefore,  that  it  is  right 
to  enslave  a  man  because  he  is  infirm?  This,  to  me,  is  a 
most  abhorrent  doctrine.  It  would  place  the  weak  every 
where  at  the  mercy  of  the  strong ;  it  would  place  the  poor 
at  the  mercy  of  the  rich ;  it  would  place  those  that  are  de 
ficient  in  intellect  at  the  mercy  of  those  who  are  gifted  in 
mental  endowment.  The  principle  of  enslaving  human 
beings  because  they  are  inferior  is  this  :  if  a  man  is  a  cripple, 
trip  him ;  if  he  is  old  and  weak  and  bowed  with  the  weight 
of  years,  strike  him,  for  he  cannot  strike  back;  if  idotic, 
take  advantage  of  him ;  and  if  a  child,  deceive  him.  This, 
sir,  this  is  the  doctrine  of  Democrats,  and  the  doctrine  of 
devils  as  well,  and  there  is  no  place  in  the  universe  outside 
the  five  points  of  hell  and  the  Democratic  party  where  the 


ANTISLAVERY  IN  THE  HOUSE  AND  SENATE  49 

practice  and  the  prevalence  of  such  doctrines  would  not  be 
a  disgrace.  (Laughter)  If  the  strong  of  the  earth  are  to 
enslave  the  weak  here,  it  would  justify  angels  in  enslaving 
men,  because  they  are  superior;  and  archangels  in  turn 
would  be  justified  in  subjugating  those  who  are  inferior  in 
intellect  and  position,  and  ultimately  it  would  transform 
Jehovah  into  an  infinite  Juggernaut  rolling  the  huge  wheels 
of  His  omnipotence  (here  Mr.  Love  joy  advanced  from  his  seat 
on  the  Republican  benches  out  into  the  long  aisle  in  front 
of  the  Democratic  benches).  Mr.  Pry  or  (advancing  from 
the  Democratic  side  to  meet  him) :  The  gentleman  from 
Illinois  shall  not  approach  this  side  of  the  House,  shaking 
his  fists  and  talking  in  the  way  he  has  talked.  It  is  bad 
enough  to  be  compelled  to  sit  here  and  hear  him  utter  his 
treasonable  and  insulting  language,  but  he  shall  not,  sir, 
come  upon  this  side  of  the  House,  shaking  his  fists  in  our 
faces."  Great  confusion  followed,  and  Mr.  Pryor  spoke  up  : 
"Let  the  gentleman  speak  from  his  seat,  and  say  all  under 
the  rules  he  is  entitled  to  say.  .  .  .  He  shall  not  come  here 
gesticulating  in  a  menacing  and  ruffianly  manner."  Here 
some  one  tried  to  pour  oil  on  the  waters  by  saying  that  Love- 
joy  should  speak  from  his  seat ;  all  knew  him  to  be  a  man 
of  courage  and  that  he  could  not  be  intimidated.  "  Mr. 
Pryor.  No  one  wants  to  intimidate  him.  Mr.  Lovejoy.  No 
body  can  intimidate  him."  Thirty  or  forty  members  were 
now  gathered  about  the  two  principals  in  the  long  aisle; 
finally  it  was  moved  that  the  committee  rise,  whereupon 
the  speaker  took  the  chair  and  asked  for  order.  "  Mr.  Barks- 
dale.  Order  that  black-hearted  scoundrel  and  nigger- 
stealing  thief  to  take  his  seat  and  this  side  of  the  House  will 
do  it.  Mr.  McQueen.  We  will  allow  nobody  to  come  over 
from  that  side  of  the  House  and  bully  us  on  this  side." 
Finally  order  was  restored,  and  Mr.  Lovejoy  went  on  to 
finish  his  sentence:  "axle-deep,  amid  the  enslaved  and 
mangled  and  bleeding  bodies  of  human  beings  (laughter  on 


50  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

the  Democratic  side)  on  the  ground  that  he  was  infinitely 
superior,  and  that  they  were  an  inferior  race.  Mr.  Gartrell. 
The  man  is  crazy. " 

As  to  the  civilizing  of  the  negroes :  "  It  is  a  strange  mode 
of  Christianizing  a  race  to  turn  them  over  into  brutism  with 
out  legal  marriage.  Among  the  four  millions  of  slaves  in 
this  country  there  is  not  a  single  husband  or  wife.  There  is 
not  legally  a  single  father  or  mother.  There  is  not  a  single 
home  or  hearthstone  among  these  four  millions.  .  .  .  Chris 
tianizing  them,  sir,  Christianizing  them  by  a  new  process. 
The  slave  states  have  a  right  to  an  exclusive  patent  on  it. 
Taking  them  out  in  sight  of  the  church,  as  one  was  taken  out 
not  long  ago  in  the  state  of  Tennessee  by  a  Presbyterian 
elder,  and  laid  down  on  his  face  on  the  ground,  his  hands  and 
his  feet  extended  to  their  utmost  tension  and  tied  to  pickets, 
and  the  Gospel  whipped  into  him  with  the  broadside  of  a 
handsaw,  discolored  whelks  of  sanctification  being  raised 
between  the  teeth  every  time  this  Gospel  agency  fell  upon 
the  naked  and  quivering  flesh  of  the  tortured  convert. 
(Laughter)  Christianized  as  a  young  girl  was  Christianized 
in  this  city  since  this  session  of  Congress,  by  being  whipped 
and  sent  to  the  garret  and  found  dead  in  the  morning,  with 
the  blood  oozing  from  nose  and  ears."  The  orator  pictured 
the  funeral,  the  fine  black  coffin  and  the  decorating  ribbons, 
and  ridiculed  the  Southern  boast  of  Christian  funerals  for 
slaves.  "See,  Mr.  Lovejoy,  there  is  a  slave  funeral.  Is 
that  treating  them  like  brutes  ?  Look  into  the  coffin  !  Look 
into  the  carriage !" 

On  the  third  point  the  speaker  denied  the  constitutionality 
of  slavery;  slavery  was  not  in  the  constitution,  and  when 
he  took  the  oath  of  office  as  Congressman  he  did  not  swear 
to  uphold  slavery.  He  knew  that  Congress  could  not  touch 
slavery  in  the  states,  and  yet  he  justified  himself  in  discuss 
ing  it  because  he  hoped  to  hold  it  up  to  the  scorn  of  all  the 
world  and  ultimately  to  secure  its  removal. 


ANTISLAVERY  IN  THE  HOUSE  AND  SENATE  51 

He  approved  of  Helper's  book  and  of  John  Brown.  "I 
tell  you,  Mr.  Chairman,  and  I  tell  you  all,  that  if  I  were  a 
slave  and  I  had  the  power,  and  were  it  necessary  to  achieve 
my  freedom,  I  would  not  hesitate  to  fill  up  and  bridge  the 
chasm  that  yawns  between  the  hell  of  slavery  and  the 
heaven  of  freedom  with  the  carcasses  of  the  slain. "  1 

As  a  result  of  this  ferocious  speech  and  the  violence  attend 
ing  it,  Pry  or  of  Virginia,  Lovejoy's  leading  antagonist, 
though  a  very  young  man,  challenged  Potter  of  Wisconsin  to 
a  duel,  undoubtedly  counting  on  the  latter's  refusal  and  the 
discomfiture  thereby  of  the  North.  The  doughty  West 
erner,  however,  turned  the  tables  by  accepting  the  chal 
lenge  and  naming  bowie  knives  as  the  weapons.  This  the 
Southerner  felt  called  upon  to  refuse,  and  the  proud  F.F.V. 
name  of  Pry  or  temporarily  became  a  byword  and  a  joke  in 
the  Northern  papers.  During  the  Republican  national 
convention  a  month  later  in  Chicago  Potter  was  presented 
with  a  bowie  knife  seven  feet  long,  appropriately  inscribed. 

Not  once  but  a  number  of  times  the  lie  was  passed  in  the 
House,  and  on  one  occasion  the  Vice  President  of  the  United 
States  was  called  upon  to  intervene  in  a  fist  fight  between 
two  members  of  the  House  on  the  steps  of  the  Capitol.  In  V 
these  various  ways  the  violence  that  attended  the  speaker- 
ship  contest  was  prolonged  to  the  very  end  of  the  session. 

The  other  House  of  Congress,  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States,  immediately  upon  assembling  in  December,  was 
plunged  into  a  discussion  of  the  slavery  question  just  as 
was  the  House  of  Representatives,  but  while  the  one  body 
considered  Helper's  book,  the  other  debated  John  Brown. 
As  promptly  as  the  celebrated  Clark  motion  in  the  House 
came  the  motion  of  Senator  Mason  of  Virginia  in  the  Senate 
for  a  special  committee  to  inquire  into  the  facts  of  the  Har 
per's  Ferry  raid,  to  determine  whether  there  was  any  oppo 
sition  to  the  troops  of  the  United  States,  whether  any  Vir- 

1  The  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  IV,  App.,  p.  202. 


52  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

ginia  citizens  or  troops  were  murdered,  whether  there  was 
"any  organization  intended  to  subvert  the  government  of  any 
of  the  states  of  the  Union,"  "what  was  the  character  of  such 
organization,"  "whether  any  citizens  of  the  United  States, 
not  present,  were  implicated  therein,  or  accessory  thereto, 
by  contributions  of  money,  ammunitions,  or  otherwise," 
"whether  any  and  what  legislation  may,  in  then-  opinion,  be 
necessary  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  for  the  future 
preservation  of  the  peace  of  the  country";  said  committee 
also  should  "have  power  to  send  for  persons  and  papers." 

Fortunately  this  motion  to  a  large  extent  served  to  throw 
the  consideration  of  the  matter  into  the  committee  away 
from  the  open  Senate,  so  that  the  latter  body,  debating  John 
Brown,  was  saved  a  repetition  of  the  excitement  of  the  pitched 
battle  in  the  House  over  Helper ;  but  few  Senators  in  open 
session  made  provoking  speeches  on  Brown.  Though  the 
sittings  of  the  committee  were  open  to  the  public,  the  testi 
mony  there  was  but  meagerly  reported  in  the  newspapers 
and  general  interest  in  the  hearings  was  small.  Indeed,  as 
Brown's  race  was  run,  and  his  principles  amply  vindicated, 
the  inquiry  was  almost  academic,  nay,  political,  as  some 
believed,  designed,  in  general,  to  throw  discredit  upon  the 
Republican  party  and  in  particular  to  make  Senator  Mason 
President. 

Strangely  enough,  a  fine  point  of  constitutional  law,  not 
directly  connected  with  Brown  himself,  but  arising  out  of 
the  proceedings  of  the  committee,  was  followed  by  the  public 
with  more  eagerness  than  was  any  of  the  testimony;  this 
was  the  right  of  a  legislative  body  to  imprison  a  contumacious 
witness  for  contempt  to  one  of  its  committees.  A  popular 
liberty  right  was  at  stake. 

Four  witnesses,  summoned  before  the  committee,  failed 
to  come  and  were  ordered  to  be  arrested  by  the  sergeant  at 
arms,  John  Brown,  Jr.,  of  Ohio,  James  Redpath  of  Massa 
chusetts,  Frank  B.  Sanborn  of  Massachusetts,  and  Thaddeus 


ANTISLAVERY  IN  THE  HOUSE  AND  SENATE  53 

Hyatt  of  New  York.  Brown  evaded  arrest  and  Redpath 
could  not  be  found.  Sanborn  was  taken  in  an  outrageous 
manner  at  Concord,  Massachusetts,  by  the  sergeant  at  arms, 
who  called  him  out  of  his  home  at  night  and  forcibly  carried 
him  off  without  showing  his  warrant  or  giving  any  reason 
for  the  arrest.  The  next  morning  the  prisoner  secured  his 
own  release  by  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  issued  by  a  judge  of 
the  state  court,  and  later  on  a  fictitious  charge  had  him 
self  arrested  by  state  officials,  in  order  that  he  might  remain 
in  the  jurisdiction  of  the  state  of  Massachusetts.  He  was 
then  safe,  for  the  Senate  did  not  choose  to  enter  into  a  con 
troversy  with  the  state  for  the  possession  of  the  prisoner. 

Hyatt,  at  first  fleeing  from  arrest,  finally  gave  himself  up 
and  voluntarily  went  to  Washington  with  his  lawyers  to 
argue  the  case.  Standing  before  the  bar  of  the  Senate  and 
not  before  the  committee,  he  gave  his  answer  in  the  form  of 
a  long  constitutional  argument  of  over  two  hours'  duration, 
read  to  empty  benches  by  two  clerks  in  succession,  who  fre 
quently  turned  two  or  three  pages  at  a  time.  The  prisoner 
was  willing  to  appear  before  the  committee  and  answer  all 
questions  if  he  were  allowed  to  do  so  of  his  own  free  will, 
but  he  said  that  he  would  not  if  constrained  by  the  threat 
of  arrest ;  the  act  of  1857  which  sought  to  compel  witnesses 
at  Congressional  investigations  to  testify  to  their  own  dis 
grace  he  regarded  as  contrary  to  common  law  and  uncon 
stitutional.  By  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  the 
Senate  had  no  power  to  constitute  itself  accuser,  judge,  jury, 
and  executive  official,  without  recourse  to  regular  indict 
ment  and  without  witnesses.1  In  favor  of  the  Senate  was 

1  Senator  Sumner  thought  that  the  Senate  had  the  power  to  compel 
answers  from  witnesses,  in  determining  elections,  returns  and  qualifica 
tions  of  members,  in  punishing  misbehavior  of  members,  in  inquiring  into 
the  conduct  of  Senate  officials,  and  in  cases  where  a  man  abused  the  privi 
leges  of  the  Senate.  But  the  case  in  hand  constituted  a  new  point,  and 
both  the  Constitution  and  reason  and  precedent  were  against  the  proposed 
new  exercise  of  the  right.  See  the  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess., 
Vol.  II,  p.  1100. 


54  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

the  contention  that  a  committee  hearing  without  such  power 
would  be  rendered  useless;  looking  in  the  same  direction 
were  many  English  and  American  colonial  cases,  and  two 
American  cases  since  1789,  the  last  as  late  as  1857. l 

Party  lines  were  broken,  prominent  Democrats  being  for 
the  accused  and  prominent  Republicans  against  him,  and 
by  a  vote  of  forty-four  to  ten  the  self-surrendered  prisoner 
was  remanded  to  the  Washington  jail  in  care  of  the  sergeant 
at  arms,  to  remain  until  such  time  as  he  should  see  fit  to 
obey  the  power  of  the  Senate  and  answer  the  questions  of 
the  committee.  Proving  obdurate,  he  languished  in  his 
prison  for  thirteen  and  one-half  weeks  and  was  only  released 
when  the  committee  completed  its  •  labors  and  made  its 
report.  Thus  Hyatt  suffered,  a  victim  in  the  opinion  of 
many  to  the  galling  slavocracy  of  the  United  States  Senate, 
and  a  hero  in  the  eyes  of  the  Northern  radicals ;  the  list  of  the 
antislavery  martyrs  was  growing  fast,  Brown,  Helper, 
Worth,  Hyatt,  and  there  were  others  to  be  added.  That 
some  of  the  opponents  of  slavery,  however,  did  not  admire 
Hyatt's  conduct  is  clearly  shown  by  the  curt  questions  of  the 
New  York  Tribune;  was  not  Hyatt  impractical?  Why, 
instead  of  tamely  giving  up,  did  he  not  follow  the  example 
of  Sanborn  and  release  himself  by  habeas  corpus  ?  Greeley 
did  not  think  that  Hyatt's  martyrdom  had  done  the  cause 
any  good. 

When  confronted  by  the  business  of  actual  legislation 
during  the  first  two  months  of  its  session,  the  Senate  found 
itself  balked  by  the  nonorganization  of  the  House  of  Repre 
sentatives,  and  the  interesting  question  arose  whether  one 
house  could  perform  its  part  in  legislation  before  the  other 


1  Wilckelhausen  vs.  Willet  in  New  York.  The  plaintiff  sued  the 
sheriff  for  allowing  a  debtor  to  escape  out  of  his  hands  into  the  control  of 
the  sergeant  at  arms  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  at  the  warrant  of 
the  speaker  of  the  House.  The  judge  decided  that  the  warrant  had  the 
force  of  a  habeas  corpus  and  was  binding  on  the  sheriff. 


ANTI^VERY  IN  THE  HOUSE  AND  SENATE  55 

house  was  able  to  proceed.  Reason  seemed  to  point  to  an 
affirmative  answer,  courtesy,  form,  and  precedent  in  the 
opposite  direction.  The  decision  seemed  to  depend  on 
whether  or  not  there  was  any  Congress,  and  this  latter  ques 
tion  further  to  depend  on  the  solution  of  the  question  whether 
or  not  there  was  any  House  of  Representatives.  There  was 
surely  a  Senate.  The  constitutional  mandate  that  the 
House  of  Representatives  should  choose  its  speaker  and 
other  officers  seemed  clearly  to  indicate  that  the  House 
existed  before  the  choice  of  these  officers ;  furthermore, 
failure  to  take  the  oath  of  office  did  not,  as  some  maintained, 
constitute  proof  of  the  nonexistence  of  the  House,  as  the 
taking  of  the  oath  three  days  after  the  organization  of  the 
first  House  proved.  The  date  of  the  taking  of  the  oath  was 
a  mere  matter  of  law  and  not  of  the  Constitution.  All  this 
was  admitted.  But  it  seemed  courteous  for  the  upper 
house,  before  proceeding  to  legislate,  to  wait  until  officially 
informed  of  the  organization  of  the  lower  house ;  precedent 
also  dictated  the  same  course.  In  1839  the  Senate  waited 
three  weeks  for  the  House,  in  1849  three  weeks  and  one 
day,  and  in  1856  two  months.  This  it  was  finally  de 
termined  to  do  in  1860,  and  for  two  months  the  Senate 
refrained  from  legislation  and  gave  itself  up  entirely  to  ex 
ecutive  business.1 

When  legislation  became  possible  the  Senate  considered 
the  same  questions  as  did  the  House.  Politics  held  sway 
much  more  than  in  the  popular  branch,  owing  undoubtedly 
to  the  presence  in  the  Senate's  membership  of  many  avowed 
candidates  for  the  presidency,  especially  of  Douglas,  the 
popular  sovereignty  champion.  Frequently  the  Republi- 

1  Credentials  were  examined,  resolutions  submitted,  memorials  pre 
sented  and  referred,  petitions  and  papers  received,  and  many  speeches 
delivered.  See  the  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  494- 
517.  The  delay  in  1839  was  occasioned  by  a  contested  election  case,  in 
1849  and  in  1856  by  a  contest  over  the  speakership. 


56  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

t£ 

cans  poured  their  wrathful  vituperation  on  the  institution  of 
slavery,  but  succeeded  in  calling  forth  only  a  few  positive 
statements  in  its  behalf,  while  at  least  one  great  and  notable 
attack  went  entirely  unanswered.  This  was  Senator  Sum- 
ner's  speech  on  'the  admission  of  Kansas  into  the  Union, 
entitled  "The  Barbarism  of  Slavery."  After  long  and 
patient  travel  in  two  continents  in  search  of  recovery  from 
the  murderous  blows  dealt  him  by  Brooks  in  the  Senate 
Chamber  four  years  previously,  the  Massachusetts  states 
man  now  returned  for  his  "revenge/7  and  in  June,  two 
months  after  Lovejoy's  effort,  he  delivered  a  four  hours' 
speech  on  slavery,  which  for  stubborn  logic,  bitter  invective, 
and  stinging,  exasperating  frankness,  has  seldom,  if  ever,  been 
equalled.  The  style  had  all  the  speaker's  well-known  literary 
and  oratorical  traits.  Pedantic  references  to  classical  and 
medieval  history  abounded ;  vigorous  use  of  language, 
sharp  epithets,  and  grace  and  charm  of  style  characterized 
the  whole,  but  through  it  all  ran  a  pervading  egotism  and 
painful  elaboration,  with  nothing  of  the  abandon,  the  spon 
taneity,  and  utter  sinking  of  self,  that  characterized  the 
great  speech  in  the  House.  The  practical  usefulness  of  the 
attack,  too,  was  seriously  questioned;  the  spirit  displayed 
was  too  vigorous  to  do  good.1 

"Slavery  is  the  sum  of  all  villainies,"  said  the  speaker  in 
opening,  quoting  John  Wesley ;  it  was  always  the  scab,  the 
canker,  the  barebones  and  the  shame  of  the  country. 
"Founded  in  violence,  sustained  only  by  violence,  such  a 
law  must,  by  a  sure  law  of  compensation,  blast  the  master 
as  well  as  the  slave ;  blast  the  community  of  which  they  are 
a  part ;  blast  the  government  which  does  not  forbid  the  out 
rage;  and  the  longer  it  exists  and  the  more  completely  it 
prevails,  must  its  blasting  influences  penetrate  the  whole 
social  system.  Barbarous  in  origin,  barbarous  in  its  law, 

1  It  was  said  at  the  time  that  Senator  Sumner  committed  his  speeches 
to  memory. 


ANTISLAVERY  IN  THE  HOUSE  AND  SENATE  57 

barbarous  in  all  its  pretensions,  barbarous  in  the  instruments 
it  employs,  barbarous  in  consequences,  barbarous  in  spirit, 
barbarous  wherever  it  shows  itself,  slavery  must  breed  bar 
barism,  while  it  develops  everywhere,  alike  in  the  individual 
and  in  the  society  to  which  he  belongs,  the  essential  elements 
of  barbarism."  In  regard  to  the  law  of  slavery  he  continued : 
"The  slave  is  held  simply  for  the  use  of  his  master,  to  whose 
behests  his  life,  liberty,  and  happiness  are  devoted,  and  by 
whom  he  may  be  bartered,  leased,  mortgaged,  bequeathed, 
invoiced,  shipped  as  cargo,  stored  as  goods,  sold  on  execution, 
knocked  off  at  public  auction,  and  even  staked  at  the  gaming 
table  on  the  hazard  of  a  card  or  a  die,  —  all  according  to  law, 
...  He  may  be  marked  like  a  hog,  branded  like  a  mule, 
yoked  like  an  ox,  hobbled  like  a  horse,  driven  like  an  ass, 
sheared  like  a  sheep,  maimed  like  a  cur,  and  constantly 
beaten  like  a  brute,  —  all  according  to  law."  There  were  five 
objectionable  elements  in  the  law  of  slavery,  —  property  hi 
man,  abrogation  of  marriage,  absence  of  the  parental  relation, 
the  closing  of  the  gates  of  knowledge,  and  the  appropriation 
of  all  toil,  —  at  the  end  of  the  consideration  of  each  of  which 
points  the  orator  would  exclaim:  "Sir,  is  not  slavery  bar 
barous?"  Consideration  of  the  practical  results  of  slavery 
led  to  a  valuable  and  exhaustive  comparison  of  the  North  and 
the  South,  similar  to  Helper's  comparison,  and  like  the  latter 
overwhelmingly  in  favor  of  the  North.  The  character  of  the 
slaveholder  was  shown  up  by  the  usual  quotations  from 
statesmen  and  authors,  and  by  a  painstaking  citation  of 
facts  drawn  from  the  whole  range  of  history. 

When  the  speaker  closed,  Senator  Chestnut  of  South  Caro 
lina  rose  for  a  brief  reply.  Although  he  was  sorry  that  the 
orator  of  the  day  was  back  at  his  post,  he  would  not  attack 
him  and  make  a  hero  of  him,  one  "who  had  been  crawling 
through  the  back  doors  to  whine  at  the  feet  of  the  British 
aristocracy,  craving  pity,  and  reaping  a  rich  harvest  of  con 
tempt,  the  slanderer  of  states  and  of  men."  Thereupon 


58  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

m 

Sumner,  who  had  been  claiming  that  slavery  made  the  slave 
holder  barbarous,  rose  and  made  one  of  the  finest  retorts  in 
the  records  of  the  Senate.  "  This  is  a  better  illustration  than 
any  I  have  cited.  I  ask  the  Senate  that  I  may  use  it  in  my 
speech  as  an  appendix."  1 

1  The  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  2590  ff. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE   POPULAR  DISCUSSION   OF  SLAVERY 

"3"1 

TOHN  Brown's  raid  heightened  the  discussion  of  slavery 
**  among  the  people  at  large  as  well  as  in  Congress. 
Editorials  on  the  subject  became  more  informing  and  more 
full  of  argument,  news  items  more  inclusive  of  the  happenings 
in  the  slavery  world ;  in  the  large  dailies  and  religious  week 
lies,  at  church,  at  home,  in  the  store  and  in  the  street,  slavery 
was  brought  home  to  men  and  women  in  every  conceivable 
f<3rm.  By  the  very  progress  of  events  countless  new  currents 
and  eddies  in  public  opinion  were  forming,  which  the  politi 
cians  of  the  time  found  it  necessary  to  take  into  account 
before  daring  to  formulate  their  platforms,  and  which  the 
present  generation  must  understand  if  it  would  appreciate 
the  politics  of  the  period. 

The  cruel,  the  unusual  sides  of  slavery,  as  the  institution 
existed  in  the  South,  were  continually  held  up  to  view.  On 
the  point,  did  the  Southern  masters  ever  burn  their  slaves 
at  the  stake  ?  angry  colloquies  were  waged  both  in  Congress 
and  before  the  people ;  the  Northerner,  answering  the  ques 
tion  in  the  affirmative,  was  a  "liar  and  a  scoundrel/'  his 
statements  were  "utterly  false,"  they  were  "foul  and  false 
slanders."  There  was  no  retraction  on  either  side.  Horace 
Greeley  set  to  work  and  in  widely  quoted  articles  on  the 
editorial  page  of  the  New  York  Tribune  produced  what 
seemed  irrefutable  evidence.  In  a  careful  historical  survey 
covering  the  previous  thirty  years  twelve  occurrences  of  the 
crime  were  brought  to  light.  The  St.  Louis  Evening  News 

59 


60  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

now  republished,  and  the  Tribune  copied,  the  accounts  which 
had  appeared  originally  in  the  St.  Louis  papers,  of  a  lynching 
of  three  negroes  the  previous  year  in  that  state  by  a  crowd 
of  one  thousand  people.  The  details  of  the  crime,  the 
stripping  of  the  negro  to  the  waist,  his  desperation,  the  fire 
licking  up  the  body  and  its  quick  effects  seen  in  the  writhing 
of  the  victim  and  his  shrieks  and  appeals  for  mercy,  his 
clutching  at  the  hot  chains  and  dropping  them,  his  pitiable 
death,  all  were  described  in  the  most  harrowing  fashion, 
obviously  with  the  conscious  effort  to  inflame  the  passions 
and  sensibilities  of  the  readers.  Thousands  and  tens  of 
thousands  of  people  read  Greeley's  presentation  of  the 
matter,  written  in  his  most  vigorous  style.1  Numerous 
instances  of  the  crime  in  1860,  taken  from  Southern  papers 
themselves,  were  brought  to  light  in  further  proof  of  the 
Northern  charges.  Two  negroes  were  burned  in  Arkansas 
and  a  subscription  was  taken  up  to  indemnify  the  owners  for 
their  loss.  The  Vicksburg  Sun  reported  the  burning  of  a 
negro  in  Mississippi,  "  whose  fate  was  decreed  by  a  council 
of  highly  respectable  gentlemen."  The  Augusta  (Georgia) 
Chronicle  told  of  a  case  in  that  state,  the  Columbus  (Georgia) 
Chronicle  of  another  in  the  same  state.  In  each  instance 
the  victim  was  guilty  of  some  fiendish  crime,  murder,  arson, 
or  rape,  which  richly  deserved  severe  punishment.  The 
frequent  lynching  of  white  murderers  and  horse  thieves  on 
the  wild  frontiers  of  the  country,  in  Iowa,  Nebraska,  and 
Arkansas,  passed  almost  unnoticed ;  only  let  the  unfortu 
nate  wrongdoer  be  a  black  slave  and  his  murderers 
Southern  slaveholders,  and  the  Republican  papers  teemed 
with  glaring  accounts. 

The  oft-repeated  descriptions  of  the  slave  auction  scarcely 
need  mention.  As  may  be  expected,  the  disgusting  points 

1  The  New  York  Tribune,  March  12  and  20,  1860 ;  for  a  very  excited 
speech  on  the  subject,  see  the  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess., 
Vol.  II,  p.  1032. 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  61 

were  those  most  dwelt  upon,  the  examination  of  the  physical 
characteristics  of  the  slave,  his  teeth,  legs  and  arms,  and  the 
coarse,  indelicate  questions  often  addressed  by  the  bidders 
to  the  young  female  slaves.  Few  could  read  the  story  with 
out  pity  and  anger.  Charges,  already  quoted  in  this  book,1 
and  scores  of  others  of  a  similar  nature,  concerned  the  denial 
to  the  slave  of  legal  marriage,  education,  and  wages,  the 
cruel  punishments,  and  the  brandings  with  the  hot  irons. 
The  masters'  advertisements  of  runaways  were  instanced, 
with  their  heartless  descriptions  of  the  tell-tale  physical 
marks  and  wounds  on  the  bodies  of  the  culprits,  and  the 
equally  cruel  advertisements  of  the  slave-catchers'  well- 
trained  packs  of  dogs,  guaranteed  in  every  case  to  secure  the 
recapture  of  fugitives. 

To  set  forth  the  lengthy  notices  of  all  these  details,  re 
peated  over  and  over  again,  is  beyond  the  compass  of  this 
book;  their  importance,  however,  can  hardly  be  overesti 
mated,  for  they  show  the  spirit  of  a  large  part  of  the  Northern 
press,  the  kind  of  reading  that  was  daily  laid  before  multi 
tudes.  The  accounts  were  exaggerated,  one-sided,  and  told 
for  a  purpose ;  from  them  all,  critical  scholars  could  not  con 
struct  an  accurate  account  of  the  institution  in  question. 
Nevertheless,  they  inflamed  and  influenced  men's  minds, 
and  constituted  an  important  chapter  in  the  history  of  the 
times. 

Defenses  of  slavery,  although  seldom  indulged  in  at  any 
length  in  Congress,  from  time  to  time  appeared  in  the  pub 
lic  prints.  Said  Edward  A.  Pollard,  in  Black  Diamonds 
Gathered  in  the  Darkey  Houses  of  the  South:  " Surely  God 
proceeds  mysteriously  to  us  in  his  works  of  Love  and  Re 
demption.  .  .  .  The  translation  of  African  savages  from 
their  country  as  slaves — a  great,  improving,  and  progressive 
work  of  civilization  —  we  also  discover  to  be  one  of  the  largest 
works  of  Christianity,  endowing  a  people  with  a  knowledge 

*  See  pp.  56-58. 


62  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

of  the  Christian  God,  and  they,  in  turn,  enlightening  us  as  to 
his  Grace,  and  the  solemn  and  precious  mystery  of  the  con 
version  of  the  soul  to  Christ.  ...  I  think  the  remarkable 
characteristic  of  our  '  peculiar  institution/  in  improving  the 
African  race  humanly,  socially,  and  religiously,  is  alone  suffi 
cient  to  justify  it.  ...  He  has  been  plucked  from  the 
wilds  of  Africa  and  saved  to  Christ. "  l  The  New  York 
Herald  regarded  slavery  "as  a  great  blessing  in  the  tropical 
climates,  and  in  the  Southern  states  of  our  Republic,  a  bless 
ing  to  the  slave,  to  the  master,  and  to  the  whole  of  this 
Union,  one  of  the  great  sources  of  our  national  prosperity. "2 
President  Lord  of  Dartmouth  College  praised  slavery  and 
believed  that  " without  a  miracle"  the  Yankees  themselves 
would  yet  call  for  slaves  in  New  England.3 

According  to  Congressman  Reagan  of  Texas,  to  free  the 
slaves  would  be  a  crime  against  reason  and  humanity ;  the 
four  million  negro  slaves  were  better  fed,  clothed,  and  pro 
tected  from  violence  and  wrong,  more  intelligent  and  pos 
sessed  of  more  religious  advantages,  than  any  other  four 
millions  of  the  human  race  anywhere.  Another  Southerner 
believed  that  to  free  the  blacks  would  amount  virtually  to 
an  annexation  of  the  Southern  states  to  Hayti  and  the  Congo, 
for  it  would  establish  here  the  same  state  of  things  that 
existed  there,  free  polygamy,  free  laziness,  free  stealing  from 
the  nearest  sheepfold  or  henroost,  and  seizure  as  slaves  of 
the  most  docile  by  the  most  savage.  Slavery  was  simply  a 
means  of  repressing  the  liberty  of  idleness.  The  masters 
did  not  permit  their  slaves  to  live  as  savages  or  as  vagabonds, 
but  set  them  to  work  in  fields  with  competent  guides.  To 
force  a  negro  to  work  enough  to  pay  for  his  housing  and  keep 
from  infancy  to  old  age  was  no  easy  matter,  and  inasmuch  as 

1  Black  Diamonds  Gathered  in  the  Darkey  Houses  of  the  South,  by  Edward 
A.  Pollard,  New  York,  1859,  p.  82.  f. 

2  The  New  York  Herald,  June  2,  1860. 
»  The  Liberator,  March  23,  1860. 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  63 

no  white  man  could  be  expected  to  do  this  for  nothing,  perma 
nent  property  in  the  black  and  ownership  of  his  industrial 
product  was  guaranteed  to  the  white  as  inducement  to  under 
take  the  task.  Where  negroes  were  numerous,  there  was 
no  alternative  between  discipline  and  freedom.  "The  in 
dustrial  education  of  a  negro  multitude  cannot  be  managed 
without  fixed  and  responsible  masters,  endowed  with  all 
necessary  authority  by  law,  and  stimulated  by  some  surer 
reward  than  the  chance  wages  to  be  derived  from  negro  con 
sciousness  and  negro  gratitude.  No  man  would  house  and 
clothe  and  feed  a  family  of  negroes  from  birth  to  maturity  for 
such  amount  of  work  as  they  might  please  to  give  him  after 
they  were  grown  up."1 

Touching  those  phases  of  slavery  that  came  nearer  home, 
Northern  people  formed  more  intelligent  ideas  than  concern 
ing  conditions  in  the  South.  Slaves  were  everywhere  ap 
pearing  out  of  the  South,  now  peacefully  seeking  aid  and 
comfort,  now  fugitive  on  the  way  to  Canada,  now  in  the 
company  of  their  masters ;  and  each  made  his  own  appeal, 
silent  or  otherwise,  to  the  freedom-loving  people  about  him. 

Mused  Horace  Greeley  in  the  New  York  Independent: 
"A  poor  woman,  born  of  an  unfortunate  race  and  of  the 
least  desirable  color,  calls  at  your  fireside  or  at  your  place  of 
business,  and  interrupts  your  labors  or  your  meditations  with 
a  request  that  you  read  her  soiled  and  sweat-stained  papers. 
Their  purport,  which  you  have  already  guessed,  is  this ;  she 
lives  in  Maryland  or  eastern  Virginia  and  has  a  daughter, 
fourteen  to  sixteen  years  of  age,  who  is  about  to  be  sent  to 
New  Orleans  and  there  to  be  sold  to  the  highest  bidder,  unless 
she  can  ransom  her  from  slavery  by  the  payment  of  several 
hundred  dollars,  towards  which  she  solicits  a  subscription 
from  you.  ...  In  your  perplexity  your  wandering  eye 
rests  on  some  representation  of  the  Man  of  Sorrows,  who  had 
not  where  to  lay  his  head,  and  your  mind  recalls  the  burden 
1  The  Liberator,  September  28,  1860. 


64  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

of  his  benign  utterance :  '  Inasmuch  as  ye  have  done  it  to  one 
of  the  least  of  these  my  brethren,  ye  have  done  it  unto  me  ! ' 
What  is  the  natural  result  of  this  timely  recollection  ?  "  1 

One  Sunday  morning  a  little  slave  girl  appeared  in  the 
Sunday  School  of  Henry  Ward  Beecher's  church  in  Brooklyn, 
New  York ;  her  mother  was  a  slave  in  Washington  and  her 
father  a  slave-dealer.  Five  of  her  brothers  and  sisters 
had  already  been  sold  South,  and  in  the  late  Christmas  holi 
days  came  the  word  that  she,  the  sixth  and  last,  was  to  be 
sold  for  breeding  purposes  for  eight  hundred  dollars.  After 
some  difficulty  the  victim  was  brought  North  and  now 
sought  alms.  This  was  the  story  told  to  the  fashionable 
gathering  of  four  hundred  white  boys  and  girls,  none  of  them 
whiter  than  the  little  slave.  The  special  collection  of  two 
hundred  dollars  only  inadequately  represented  the  sympathy 
aroused.  The  great  preacher  himself,  at  the  end  of  the 
morning  sermon,  brought  the  slave  to  the  platform  and  in 
simple  but  eloquent  language  presented  her  cause  to  the 
large  congregation.  The  shameful  fate  was  prevented. 
Added  Greeley  the  next  morning  in  the  Tribune:  "How 
noble  is  chivalry  !  To  beget  white  daughters  and  then  have 
them  sold  as  breeders  !"  2 

Such  an  occurrence  was  not  uncommon  in  the  Northern 
churches.  Cards  in  the  newspapers  often  called  for  the 
charity;  on  several  occasions  the  Republican  members  of 
the  national  House  of  Representatives  at  Washington  gen 
erously  gave  their  aid  for  the  same  cause. 

Again  mused  the  Tribune  editor:  "A  hunted  and  weary 
fugitive  crosses  your  doorstep,  imploring  protection  and  sus 
tenance.  He  has  traveled  through  many  long  and  tedious 
nights,  avoiding  cities  and  thronged  highways,  keeping  as 
far  to  the  woods  and  traveling  by  night  only,  through  dew- 
drenched  weeds  and  briers  which  have  torn  most  of  his 

1  The  New  York  Independent,  October  4,  1860. 

2  The  New  York  Tribune,  February  6,  1860. 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  65 

coarse  and  flimsy  garments  from  his  limbs,  guided  only  by 
the  often  shrouded  light  of  the  North  Star.  Perplexed 
by  what  seems  a  divided  duty,  you  naturally  ask,  'What 
would  my  Saviour  desire  me  to  do  in  the  premises  ?'  "  1 

Owen  Lovejoy's  answer  to  the  question  was :  "I  have  no 
more  hesitation  in  helping  a  fugitive  slave  than  I  have  in 
snatching  a  lamb  from  the  jaws  of  a  wolf,  or  disengaging  an 
infant  from  the  talons  of  an  eagle.  Not  a  bit.  Long  enough 
has  the  nation  crouched  and  cowered  in  the  presence  of  this 
stupendous  wrong."  Thousands  felt  the  same  and  acted  on 
their  feelings. 

Forcible  rescues  of  fugitives  out  of  the  hands  of  the  United 
States  officials,  who  had  arrested  them  under  the  national 
fugitive  slave  law,  constantly  occurred.  The  famous  Ottawa 
rescue  was  fresh  in  the  public  mind  throughout  the  year. 
In  that  small  town  in  Illinois,  while  the  first  news  of  John 
Brown's  raid  was  spreading  over  the  country,  a  large  mob, 
amid  intense  excitement,  forcibly  rescued  a  negro  out  of  the 
hands  of  the  officers  of  the  law  and  secured  his  escape.  John 
Hossack  and  two  associates,  leaders  in  the  affray,  were 
promptly  arrested,  conveyed  to  Chicago  for  safe  keeping, 
and  after  long  delay  finally  brought  to  trial.  Conviction, 
fines,  and  short  terms  of  imprisonment  followed,  but  through 
the  inability  of  the  prisoners  to  pay  the  fines  and  costs  the 
imprisonment  seemed  destined  to  be  very  long.  The  presi 
dential  campaign  was  now  far  advanced ;  but  the  mayor  of 
Chicago,  a  strong  antislavery  man  and  editor  of  the  leading 
Republican  paper  of  the  Northwest,  had  the  strength  of  his 
convictions  and  opened  his  office  for  public  subscriptions. 
In  a  few  days7  time,  from  all  over  the  Northwestern  states, 
seventeen  hundred  dollars  poured  in,  and  in  a  very  exciting 
public  meeting,  with  the  election  but  four  weeks  off,  the 
prisoners  were  released.  Antislavery  had  produced  a  new 
hero  at  the  very  moment  the  people  were  called  upon  to 

1  The  New  York  Independent,  October  4,  1860. 


66  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

41 

deliver  their  judgment  at  the  polls.  Hossack  took  his 
position  alongside  of  Brown,  Helper,  Worth,  and  Hyatt. 

Late  in  April  there  was  a  notable  rescue  at  Troy,  New 
York.  A  crowd  of  one  thousand  people,  including  many  free 
negroes,  gathered  about  the  office  of  the  United  States  Com 
missioner,  where  that  official,  on  testimony  of  witnesses  from 
Virginia,  had  just  remanded  to  his  old  master  a  negro  who 
had  long  lived  quietly  in  the  community  as  a  hard-working 
mechanic;  the  prisoner  was  about  to  be  taken  from  the 
building  when  the  deputy  sheriff  arrived  with  a  writ  of 
habeas  corpus,  and  while  this  was  being  served,  the  crowd, 
with  tremendous  cheering  and  enthusiasm,  rushed  the  offi 
cers  off  their  feet.  In  the  tumult  the  prisoner  escaped  to  the 
river,  was  carried  across  to  the  opposite  shore  in  a  skiff,  was 
there  again  arrested,  but  again  promptly  rescued,  this  time 
never  to  be  recaptured.  Similar  cases  were  reported  in  the 
local  newspapers  throughout  the  spring  and  early  summer  in 
various  sections.  Fugitive  slaves,  going  North,  were  re 
ported  at  Auburn,  New  York ;  New  York  City ;  Boston, 
Greenfield,  Massachusetts,  Rochester,  Cincinnati,  etc.;  at 
New  York  and  Philadelphia,  without  any  excitement,  cap 
tured  fugitives  were  rendered  back  to  their  masters. 

Over  against  the  law  of  Congress  under  which  these  rescues 
were  declared  a  crime  and  punished  by  the  national  govern 
ment,  were  the  so-called  personal  liberty  laws  of  the  North 
ern  states.  These  statutes,  which  sought  to  frustrate  the 
national  law,  were  under  another  name  the  most  practical 
nullification  laws  ever  set  in  motion  by  states  against  a  law 
of  the  United  States.  Soon  after  the  enactment  of  the  ob 
jectionable  fugitive  slave  law  of  1850  Vermont  led  the  way  in 
resistance  by  declaring  that  state  officials,  under  pain  of  fine 
and  imprisonment,  should  not  help  execute  the  national  law ; 
the  use  of  the  jails  in  the  state  was  forbidden  to  the  Southern 
masters,  the  Attorney-General  of  the  state  was  required  to 
defend  the  slaves,  and  to  the  latter  trial  by  jury  was  guar- 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  67 

anteed ;  to  take  a  fugitive  unlawfully  from  the  state  was  for 
bidden  under  pain  of  fine  and  imprisonment ;  slaves  brought 
into  the  state  were  declared  free,  and  persons  attempting  to 
hold  such  as  slaves  might  be  punished  by  a  sentence  of  from 
one  to  fifteen  years  in  the  penitentiary  and  by  a  fine  of  not 
over  two  thousand  dollars.  The  Michigan  legislature  fol 
lowed  in  like  tenor;  then  came  Wisconsin  with  the  most 
extreme  of  all  such  laws.  In  this  Western  state,  in  addition 
to  the  impediments  created  in  Vermont,  there  was  habeas 
corpus  for  the  black  on  the  mere  statement  of  the  Attorney- 
General  ;  all  the  expenses  of  the  action  were  to  be  paid  by 
the  state,  and  to  take  a  negro  out  of  the  state  was  most 
severely  prohibited.  Almost  every  Northern  state  had  laws 
on  the  subject  with  varying  restrictions  and  provisions, 
enacted  during  the  decade,  1850-1860,  and  in  active  opera 
tion  in  1860.  States  that  prohibited  officers  and  citizens 
from  aiding  in  execution  of  the  national  law  were  Maine, 
New  Hampshire,  Vermont,  Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island, 
Connecticut,  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  New  Jersey,  Michi 
gan  and  Wisconsin ;  states  that  denied  the  use  of  all  public 
buildings  to  the  master  were  Maine,  Vermont,  Rhode  Island 
and  Michigan ;  states  that  provided  defense  for  the  fugitives 
were  Maine,  Vermont,  Massachusetts,  New  York,  Pennsyl 
vania,  Michigan,  and  Wisconsin;  states  that  declared  all 
fugitives  within  the  state  free  were  Maine,  New  Hampshire, 
and  Vermont ;  New  Hampshire  declared  free  any  black 
within  her  borders.1 

The  two  sets  of  laws,  so  antagonistic  in  their  provisions  and 
purposes,  the  one  national  and  the  other  state,  led  to  many 
a  conflict  in  the  courts,  one  of  the  most  famous  of  which  now 

1  See  a  valuable  report  on  the  subject  by  the  joint  committee  of  the 
two  houses  of  the  Virginia  Legislature  on  Harper's  Ferry,  in  the  New 
York  Herald,  January  30,  1860 ;  copies  of  all  the  laws  are  in  the  appendix 
to  this  report.  The  New  York  Tribune,  February  15,  1860,  gives  a  report 
of  a  committee  of  the  New  York  legislature  on  the  subject.  In  1860  there 
were  some  attempts  to  make  these  state  laws  more  stringent. 


68  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

came  to  a  head.  Sherman  M.  Booth,  the  editor  of  an  aboli 
tion  paper  in  Milwaukee,  Wisconsin,  was  arrested  in  1854 
for  aiding  in  the  rescue  of  the  fugitive  Joshua  Glover  from 
the  Milwaukee  County  jail.  Freed  by  the  habeas  corpus  of 
the  state  Supreme  Court,  then  twice  rearrested  and  twice 
again  freed  by  the  same  means,  Booth  for  a  time  was  lost 
sight  of  in  a  contest  between  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States,  which  insisted  on  asserting  its  power  to  review 
a  habeas  corpus  writ  of  a  state  court,  and  the  state  Supreme 
Court,  which  insisted  on  declaring  that  habeas  corpus  was 
original  in  the  states  and  not  subject  to  review  by  the  Su 
preme  Court  of  the  United  States.  Due  to  complications 
in  the  composition  of  the  state  tribunal,  this  body  by  a  vote 
of  one  to  one  refused  to  obey  the  order  of  the  court  at  Wash 
ington  to  remand  Booth  to  prison,  and  for  several  years  the 
latter  was  free.  Finally  the  membership  in  the  state  court 
changed,  and  in  March,  1860,  came  another  order  from 
Washington  for  the  culprit's  arrest,  and  again  a  one  to  one 
vote  in  the  state  court,  but  this  time  against  a  habeas  corpus 
writ  for  the  prisoner,  who  was  now  kept  closely  guarded  in 
the  Milwaukee  Custom  House.  There  he  remained  for  five 
or  six  months,  in  prison  for  his  opinions,  another  antislavery 
hero,  a  fit  companion  for  Brown,  Helper,  Worth,  Hyatt,  and 
Hossack.  Presently  he  was  rescued  by  a  mob ;  twice,  amid 
intense  excitement  and  uproar,  his  rearrest  was  attempted 
but  frustrated,  on  one  occasion  by  an  armed  guard  of  sixty- 
two  citizens ;  at  last,  however,  he  was  taken  while  off  his 
guard,  on  his  way  home  from  a  Republican  campaign  meet 
ing.  The  presidential  election  was  now  less  than  four  weeks 
off,  so  that  at  that  crisis  Booth,  like  Hossack,  loomed  large 
in  the  public  mind,  especially  in  the  antislavery  Northwest. 
The  list  of  antislavery  heroes  in  all  parts  of  the  country  was 
large.  For  almost  the  entire  year  Booth's  case  helped  to  es 
trange  section  from  section,  the  aggrieved  South  from  the  out 
raged  North.  To  the  one  section,  which  charged  that  the  other 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  69 

was  guilty  of  rank  nullification  of  United  States  law  and  re 
sistance  to  the  United  States  courts,  the  constant  reply  was 
that  Wisconsin  was  but  standing  out  for  right  and  freedom. 

Other  cases  of  judicial  conflict  served  to  fan  the  sectional 
fires.  On  technicalities  the  Governors  of  Ohio  and  of  Iowa 
refused  to  give  up  to  Virginia  certain  members  of  the  John 
Brown  band  who  had  fled  to  their  states ;  Virginia  affected 
to  feel  highly  insulted,  and  the  Governor  and  the  legislature 
in  official  documents,  which  were  more  or  less  widely  pub 
lished  in  the  newspapers,  made  the  most  of  the  situation  for 
the  Southern  cause.  On  the  ground  that  in  Ohio  it  was  no 
crime  to  steal  slaves  the  Governor  of  the  state  refused  to 
extradite  to  Tennessee  a  man  accused  of  this  crime  in  that 
state,  and  not  until  the  formal  charges  were  altered  did  the 
Ohio  Executive  yield ;  for  the  same  reason  he  would  not 
give  up  to  Kentucky  a  man  accused  there  of  aiding  slaves  to 
escape.  Similarly,  the  Governor  of  Illinois  displeased  the 
Governor  of  Kentucky.  All  these  cases  achieved  promi 
nence. 

When  not  fugitive,  but  traveling  in  the  North  with  their 
masters,  Southern  slaves  were  liable  to  capture  and  libera 
tion  by  the  radical  abolitionists  and  free  negroes,  either 
acting  forcibly  or  by  the  ever-present  habeas  corpus.  The 
Savannah  Blues,  a  famous  military  organization,  set  upon 
in  this  way  in  New  York,  saved  their  servants  only  by  stout 
physical  resistance.  A  master,  taking  his  slaves  from  Vir 
ginia  to  Missouri  by  boat  and  coming  ashore  at  Cincinnati, 
saved  his  property  by  the  favor  of  a  judge,  who  refused  a 
habeas  corpus  for  the  slaves  on  the  ground  that  slaveholders 
must  be  accorded  some  rights  on  the  dividing  river  between 
slavery  and  freedom.  Terrifying  threats  were  held  over  a 
pleasure  party  near  Detroit.  This  case  arose  out  of  the 
defiance  of  a  law  then  recently  enacted  by  the  Michigan 
legislature,  inflicting  fine  and  imprisonment  on  all  who 
brought  slaves  into  the  state.  Although  cordially  invited 


70  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

by  Northern  railroads,  including  the  Michigan  Central, 
the  coming  into  the  state  of  the  party  of  excursionists,  be 
tween  two  and  three  hundred  in  number,  was  greeted  at  the 
small  town  of  Marshall,  Michigan,  with  the  following  hand 
bill :  "  Republicans  to  the  rescue  !  Two  hundred  Southern 
slaveholders  with  their  slaves  will  pass  through  our  city  this 
afternoon  and  will  dine  at  the  depot.  This  is  a  flagrant 
violation  of  the  laws  of  the  state.  .  .  .  Republicans  to 
arms  !  Strike  for  the  memory  of  John  Brown  !" 

The  Lemmon  case  in  the  courts  of  the  state  of  New  York^ 
brought  the  judicial  side  of  this  question  of  the  freedom  of 
the  personal  servants  of  Southern  masters  in  the  free  states 
prominently  before  the  public.  In  1850  Jonathan  Lemmon, 
his  wife,  and  eight  slaves,  on  their  way  from  Virginia  to 
Texas,  came  to  New  York,  where  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus 
led  to  the  liberation  of  the  blacks,  who  forthwith  fled  to 
Canada.  Although  the  property  was  gone  beyond  recovery, 
Lemmon  carried  the  case  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  state, 
where  after  some  years  the  original  action  against  Lemmon 
was  affirmed.  The  Court  of  Appeals  was  next  reached,  and 
there  in  the  spring  of  1860,  while  politics  and  the  "  irrepres 
sible  conflict"  were  already  agitating  the  people  as  never 
before,  the  case  was  argued  by  Charles  O' Conor  on  the 
side  of  slavery  against  William  M.  Evarts  on  the  side  of 
freedom.  The  decision  affirmed  the  position  of  the  lower 
courts,  and  so  far  as  the  state  tribunals  were  concerned  de 
clared  that  no  black  could  be  held  a  slave  in  the  state.  Be 
cause  of  the  intense  popular  interest  the  arguments  of  the 
rival  lawyers  were  widely  published,  and  when  the  result 
was  known  it  was  deemed  on  all  sides  that  a  strong  blow  had 
been  struck  for  freedom.  Yet  although  in  line  with  a  long 
series  of  precedents,  the  decision  was  plainly  a  denial  of  the 
principles  of  the  more  famous  Dred  Scott  case  in  the  United 
States  Supreme  Court,  and  according  to  common  expectation 
would  soon  be  carried  on  appeal  by  the  state  of  Virginia  to 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  7x 

that  highest  national  tribunal.  There,  beyond  a  doubt,  a 
decision  definitely  nationalizing  slavery  would  be  given,  and 
the  Lemmon  case  would  take  its  place  in  the  judicial  annals 
of  the  country,  infamous  or  famous  according  to  the  point  of 
view.  From  this  the  nation  was  saved  by  the  outbreak  of 
war.1 

Occasionally  Northern  John  Browns  raided  the  border  line 
of  slavery.  Near  Hannibal,  Missouri,  according  to  the  Daily 
Missouri  Republican  of  St.  Louis,  the  thieving  operations  of 
abolitionists  contrived  to  carry  four  Missouri  negroes  across 
the  river  to  freedom  in  Illinois ;  an  exciting  chase  followed 
and  the  blacks  were  recovered,  although  the  robbers  escaped. 
Excitement  in  the  vicinity  was  at  fever  heat.  In  La  Grange 
County,  in  the  same  state,  two  white  men  were  caught  by 
the  regulators  running  off  a  negro ;  after  confession  the  cul 
prits  were  hung,  then  cut  down,  whipped  and  ordered  from 
the  state. 

To  retaliate  for  these  various  and  sundry  attacks  on  their 
property,  abundant  opportunity  was  afforded  to  the  South 
erners  along  the  border  line  by  the  presence  in  the  free  states 
of  the  free  negroes.  These  unfortunates  differed  in  no  way 
from  slaves  in  color  and  habits  and  could  frequently  be  kid 
napped  and  hurried  into  the  slave  states  and  converted  into 
money.  Then*  very  presence  near  slavery  invited  man- 
stealing.  Many  were  the  exciting  kidnapping  tales  going 
the  rounds  of  the  papers.  The  Lawrence  Sentinel  of  Law 
rence,  Kansas,  complained  that  hardly  a  paper  in  that  terri 
tory  failed  day  after  day  to  contain  notices  of  such  a  case. 
In  some  places  there  were  organized  gangs  to  carry  on  the 
traffic.  The  crime  was  reported  from  Iowa  City,  Iowa, 
Lancaster,  Pennsylvania,  Watertown,  New  York,  Sandusky 
and  Cincinnati,  Ohio,  Galena  and  Grafton,  Illinois. 

1  O'Conor's  argument,  in  abstract,  was  published  in  the  New  York 
Times,  January  25,  1860;  that  of  Evarts  in  full  appeared  in  the  New 
York  Independent  in  the  month  of  April  of  the  same  year. 


72  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

The  following  story  of  the  last-named  case  appeared 
originally  in  the  Chicago  Tribune  and  was  copied  in  many  an 
Eastern  paper.  Scores  of  equally  harrowing  tales  could  be 
collected.  Five  colored  men  were  decoyed  into  a  grocery 
store  in  Clifton,  Illinois,  and  there  suddenly  confronted  by 
seven  or  eight  heavily  armed  whites ;  after  a  tussle  in  which 
two  of  the  blacks  escaped,  the  three  remaining  ones  were 
handcuffed,  thrown  into  a  wagon,  driven  off  to  the  Illinois 
Central  Railroad,  and  with  the  connivance  of  Irish  section 
hands  and  of  a  compliant  railroad  conductor  were  placed  on 
the  train  and  taken  to  St.  Louis.  Disposal  of  the  booty  was 
not  so  easy.  In  answer  to  the  query:  "Who  is  your  mas 
ter?"  one  of  the  prisoners  averred  that  he  was  then  and 
always  had  been  free,  and  the  second  refused  to  answer: 
whipping  and  hunger  failing  to  change  the  story  the  two  were 
sold  South.  While  this  was  going  on,  one  Aime"  Pernard, 
a  farmer  living  near  the  city,  whom  the  third  victim,  called 
Jim,  claimed  as  his  former  master,  was  visited  by  one  of  the 
kidnappers  with  offers  to  buy  the  chances  of  capture  of  his 
slave  after  five  years'  absence;  one  hundred  dollars  was 
offered ;  the  offer  was  trebled  and  quadrupled,  and  at  last 
multiplied  by  ten,  but  all  to  no  purpose ;  Pernard  would  not 
sell.  But  his  suspicions  were  aroused.  With  some  search 
he  located  his  property,  paid  the  customary  fees  allowed  by 
the  laws  of  the  state  to  the  captors  of  fugitive  slaves,  to 
gether  with  the  jailor's  fees,  and  took  his  slave  home.  Free 
papers  followed,  a  railroad  ticket  was  purchased,  and  Jim 
was  sent  back  home  to  his  wife  and  family,  a  free  man.  The 
story  was  dressed  out  in  the  most  extravagant  language. 
"  i  Niggers  have  no  feeling.  It  don't  hurt  them  to  have  their 
,  domestic  life  made  the  plaything  of  white  men's  cupidity 
I  and  lust,'  say  the  man-sellers.  That  strong  woman's  joy 
as  she  clasped  her  husband  in  her  arms,  her  devout  thanks 
giving  to  God  that  her  life  was  not  left  dark ;  her  breaking 
down  under  the  flood  of  emotion  which  the  glad  event 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  73 

aroused,  her  sobs  and  plaints  interrupted  only  by  the  united 
prayers  to  the  Father  of  whites  and  blacks  alike;  the  deep 
feeling  that  Jim  displayed ;  the  delicious  joy,  ennobled  by  the 
new  consciousness  of  freedom  and  security  in  the  possession 
of  a  wife  and  home,  —  these,  leaving  not  a  dry  eye  in  the 
little  crowd  of  onlookers,  disprove  the  charge."  1 

As  unfailing  as  were  these  stories  and  episodes  in  regard  to 
the  domestic  phases  of  slavery,  they  were  probably  equalled 
hi  prominence  and  general  interest  as  news  items  by  the 
notices  of  the  continued  progress  of  the  foreign  slave  trade. 
Hardly  a  single  issue  of  any  prominent  newspaper  failed  to 
contain  something  on  the  abominable  traffic.  Native  Afri 
cans,  as  for  two  hundred  and  fifty  years  past,  were  still 
being  kidnapped  and  brought  into  servitude,  either  clandes 
tinely  in  the  United  States  or  openly  in  the  Spanish  province 
of  Cuba. 

At  the  very  end  of  1859  the  yacht  Wanderer,  amid  much 
rejoicing  on  the  part  of  the  Southern  people,  landed  several 
hundred  Africans  on  the  shores  of  Georgia.  The  Wildfire, 
sailing  from  New  York,  December,  1859,  in  the  vicinity  of 
the  Congo  River  in  Africa  secured  a  cargo  of  six  hundred  and 
three  negroes,  of  whom  five  hundred  and  twenty  remained 
when  the  vessel  was  captured  off  Cuba ;  the  William,  leaving 
the  Congo  nine  days  before  the  Wildfire,  with  seven  hundred 
and  ninety  blacks,  arrived  in  Cuban  waters  to  be  taken  with 
five  hundred  and  thirteen  of  her  victims  still  on  board.  On 
Christmas  Eve,  1859,  the  Orion  was  seized  off  the  coast  of 
Africa  and  conveyed  to  the  Island  of  St.  Helena,  having 
eight  hundred  and  seventy-four  negroes  on  board,  six  hundred 
and  seventy-four  males  and  two  hundred  females ;  one  hun 
dred  and  forty-six  died  on  the  short  voyage.  It  would  be 
tedious  to  relate  the  details  of  every  capture.  The  New 

1  The  Albany  Evening  Journal,  August  17,  1860.  The  ladies  of  Clifton 
thanked  Pernard  for  his  generosity  and  invited  him  to  Clifton ;  Pernard 
declined  the  invitation.  This  correspondence  was  published. 


74  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

York  Evening  Post  published  a  list  of  eight-five  American 
vessels  apprehended  as  slave  traders  in  the  previous  eighteen 
months,  while  the  New  York  Herald  at  the  same  time  placed 
the  number  as  at  least  one  hundred.  Almost  every  day, 
and  certainly  every  week,  the  metropolitan  dailies  reported 
captures  and  escapes.  One  slaver  in  four,  it  was  estimated, 
was  taken. 

The  traffic,  which  had  gradually  declined  during  the  decade 
of  the  forties  and  perhaps  even  to  a  later  date,  was  now 
greater  than  for  a  number  of  years  and  was  rapidly  increasing. 
According  to  the  statistics  of  the  British  Foreign  Office, 
approximately  one  hundred  and  thirty-five  thousand  natives 
were  exported  from  Africa  as  slaves  in  1835 ;  in  1859  from 
thirty-five  to  forty  thousand  arrived  in  Cuba,  principally 
Havana,  which  was  the  world's  greatest  slave  market.  The 
charges  that  a  large  number  of  fresh  Africans  reached  the 
Southern  shores  of  the  United  States  were  not  proved.1 

Profits,  which  were  the  motive  of  the  nefarious  commerce, 
were  enormous.  Secured  in  Africa  for  a  mere  song,  ten  to 
fifteen  dollars  each,  every  negro  safely  landed  in  Cuba 
yielded  from  three  to  four  hundred  dollars  net  gain,  or  three 
hundred  thousand  dollars  on  a  cargo  of  one  thousand ;  one 
cargo  of  four  hundred  and  fifty  was  sold  in  Trinidad  for  six 
hundred  and  fifty  dollars  each,  and  in  the  United  States, 
where  prices  of  blacks  had  increased  almost  one  hundred 
per  cent  in  the  past  decade  and  were  then  ranging  from 
two  thousand  to  twenty-five  hundred  dollars  for  able-bodied 
"American  negroes,"  much  more  than  six  hundred  and  fifty 
dollars  must  have  been  realized  for  fresh,  able-bodied 
Africans.  It  was  commonly  stated  that  if  three  out  of  four 
of  the  slave  ships  suffered  capture  and  one  got  through  in 
safety,  the  owner  would  feel  repaid ;  if  the  cargo  was  landed, 
the  loss  of  the  vessel  was  but  little. 

1  Beyond  the  several  hundred  brought  in  by  the  Wanderer,  no  definite 
data  was  furnished,  although  various  local  papers  in  the  Gulf  States 
chronicled  the  arrival  of  small  parties. 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  75 

In  Cuba  the  strongest  stay  of  the  market  was  the  pros 
perity  of  the  sugar  industry,  in  the  United  States  the  pros 
perity  of  the  sugar  and  cotton  industries. 

Descriptions  abounded  of  the  passage  of  a  slaver  over  to 
American  waters;  the  following  is  typical.  "The  scene 
between  the  decks  was  shocking.  Stowed  in  a  sitting  post 
ure,  with  their  knees  drawn  up  close  to  then-  breast,  were 
over  five  hundred  human  beings,  whose  skin  was  black, 
mostly  children  and  young  persons,  and  some  women.  So 
close  were  they  packed  that  they  could  not  move,  and  could 
hardly  breathe.  In  this  suffocating  position  they  were  strug 
gling  for  life.  The  strong  were  killing  the  weak  to  make 
room  for  themselves,  and  that  a  little  more  of  God's  air  might 
be  had.  Disease  was  among  them  in  many  forms,  and 
especially  opthalmia.  Seasick,  homesick,  starving,  crying 
for  air  and  water,  these  poor  wretches  crowded  then-  floating 
charnel  house.  But  the  slavers  were  merciful,  for  they 
helped  the  slave  to  die.  When  one  was  sick  nigh  unto  death, 
they  would  kindly  assist  him  or  her  overboard,  before  the 
soul  had  left  the  body.  The  quality  of  their  mercy  was  not 
strained  either,  for  they  sometimes  would  substitute  another 
death  for  drowning  —  the  negro  was  knocked  on  the  head 
with  an  axe.  Disease  breaking  out,  it  was  supposed  to  be 
contagious,  and  the  sufferers  were  made  away  with  without 
any  scruples  of  the  troublesome  thing  called  conscience. 
An  idea  of  the  mortality  on  board  of  the  Tavernier  may  be 
formed  when  I  state  that  after  her  capture  by  the  Viper, 
upon  her  passage  over  to  St.  Helena,  whither  she  was  sent 
in  charge  of  a  prize  crew,  nearly  one  hundred  of  her  negroes 
died.  This  was  during  a  run  of  only  about  ten  days  dura 
tion." 

Although  probably  but  few  of  the  unfortunates  reached 
the  United  States,  the  proslavery  administration  in  four 
important  respects  was  yet  charged  with  responsibility  for 
the  existence  of  the  trade  beyond  her  borders ;  at  New  York 


76  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

and  the  other  cities  on  the  sea  board,  where  the  ships  were 
fitted  out,  the  revenue  laws  were  but  poorly  enforced ;  the 
naval  squadrons  in  Cuban  and  African  waters,  charged  with 
the  duty  of  suppressing  the  trade,  were  hampered  by  inade 
quate  laws,  regulations,  and  instructions;  the  proslavery 
United  States  Senate  refused  to  make  these  laws  more  strin 
gent  ;  and  the  United  States  courts  were  far  from  strict  in 
punishing  infractions  of  the  law. 

New  York  was  the  chief  commercial  depot  for  the  fitting 
out  of  the  slavers,  just  as  Havana  was  the  chief  market  for 
the  sale  of  slaves,  and  few  ships,  destined  for  the  illegal  trade, 
experienced  any  difficulty  in  securing  from  the  New  York 
Custom  House  legal  clearance  papers.  With  a  bribe  to  the 
proper  officials  of  from  five  hundred  to  four  thousand  dollars 
the  intended  slaver  could  easily  get  away,  although  proper 
inspection  would  readily  disclose  its  unlawful  purpose  and 
render  it  liable  to  seizure.  A  lawful  voyage  was  scarcely 
compatible  with  the  following  telltale  cargo :  lumber,  which 
could  not  be  used  in  Africa  but  was  intended  for  the  purpose 
of  building  slave  decks  ;  many  buckets  and  sponges  to  wash 
down  the  slaves ;  disinfectants  for  use  on  the  decks ;  stills 
for  cooking  purposes ;  casks,  ostensibly  to  be  used  in  the  palm 
oil  trade  on  the  African  coast  but  in  reality  for  the  carrying 
of  fresh  water  on  board  the  slavers  ;  and  finally  various  trin 
kets,  looking-glasses,  handkerchiefs,  calico  prints,  denims, 
beads,  etc.,  of  practical  value  only  among  the  simple-minded 
Africans.  Such  a  list  was  evidence  enough  that  the  ship  was 
bound  for  the  Congo  coast  for  slave-trading  purposes,  —  evi 
dence  enough  to  the  public  if  not  to  the  officials. 

The  nation's  responsibility  was  a  joint  one,  shared  by 
Great  Britain.  Under  the  Webster-Ashburton  treaty  the 
two  powers  were  cooperating  with  each  other,  though  not 
very  harmoniously  and  successfully,  for  the  suppression  of 
the  traffic.  Each  was  maintaining  a  squadron  of  naval 
vessels  in  both  Cuban  and  African  waters,  and  each  was 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  77 

guaranteeing  to  the  crews  of  its  vessels  the  payment  of  prize 
money  for  captures;  but  where  the  English,  with  their 
swift  steam  vessels  and  the  certain  assurance  of  twenty- 
five  dollars  for  every  negro  taken,  made  six  captures,  the 
Americans  with  sailing  vessels  or  worn-out  steamships  and 
the  same  prospect  of  reward,  took  but  one.  The  instructions 
of  the  Washington  government  to  its  representatives  were 
clearly  inadequate  and  were  justly  criticized  by  Lord  John 
Russell  of  the  British  Foreign  Office  and  by  the  world  in 
general.  When  the  American  officials  made  a  mistake  in 
carrying  out  their  instructions,  they  were  personally  liable 
to  damages;  this  rendered  them  too  careful.  They  could 
take  no  vessel  which  was  palpably  equipped  for  receiving 
slaves  but  had  not  yet  received  its  cargo ;  no  American  could 
capture  a  vessel  with  a  foreign  flag,  and  vessels  without  a 
flag  and  without  papers  also  went  unmolested,  and  thus, 
when  the  time  of  danger  arrived,  many  a  ship  from  New 
York  escaped  merely  by  hoisting  a  foreign  flag  or  by  throw 
ing  overboard  both  flag  and  papers.  On  the  other  hand, 
if  a  New  York  slaver  fell  in  with  a  British  man-of-war,  she 
could  save  herself  by  her  United  States  flag,  for  the  Southern 
statesmen  who  had  long  directed  American  diplomacy,  in 
sisted  that  to  allow  Englishmen  to  board  an  American  vessel 
under  such  circumstances  amounted  in  reality  to  submitting 
to  the  accursed  right  of  search,  and  slave  trade  or  no  slave 
trade,  this  could  never  be  allowed.1  Sometimes  the  American 
trader,  flying  the  American  flag,  could  be  induced  by  the 
British  to  throw  overboard  its  flag  and  papers  and  become 
a  British  prize,  by  the  offer  of  immunity  to  the  officers  and 
crew  and  the  threat  that,  if  they  did  not  give  up,  they  would 
be  turned  over  to  the  Americans  and  sent  home  for  trial. 

1  In  1858  numerous  captures  by  the  English  in  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  of 
slave  traders  flying  the  American  flag  almost  led  to  war,  and  were  only 
stopped  by  President  Buchanan  by  a  vigorous  assertion  of  the  Southern 
principle. 


78  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

These  principles,  complained  the  British,  simply  granted 
practical  immunity,  made  the  slave  trade  easy,  and  led  to 
the  hoisting  of  the  American  flag  by  all  slavers,  whatever 
their  nationality. 

Over  all  attempts  to  improve  these  defects  of  national 
policy  by  means  of  legislation  the  Democratic  United  States 
Senate  held  an  efficient  veto ;  two  stringent  bills  on  the  sub 
ject,  drawn  from  the  Republican  point  of  view,  one  intro 
duced  by  Senator  Seward  of  New  York  and  the  other  by 
Senator  Wilson  of  Massachusetts,  were  defeated  by  de 
cisive  votes. 

Finally  the  courts  were  blamed.  In  spite  of  the  Con 
gressional  prohibition  of  the  traffic  and  in  spite  of  the  threat 
of  the  death  penalty  for  participation  in  the  same,  the  traffic 
was  flourishing  with  impunity,  and  in  the  whole  history  of  the 
country  not  one  man  had  been  executed  for  breaking  the  law. 
United  States  District  Attorney  Roosevelt  of  New  York,  who 
was  bound  to  President  Buchanan  by  social  ties  and  who 
therefore  may  fairly  be  assumed  to  have  spoken  the  mind  of 
the  President,  even  went  so  far  as  to  state  publicly  that  the 
latter  would  "  probably  pardon "  any  one  convicted  under 
the  law ;  he  thought  that  public  opinion  had  ceased  to  regard 
the  slave  trade  as  piracy  and  would  not  uphold  the  infliction 
of  the  death  penalty.  Judge  Magrath  of  the  United  States 
District  Court  at  Charleston,  South  Carolina,  in  the  case 
of  Captain  Currie  of  the  yacht  Wanderer,  ruled  that  under 
the  law  of  1820  to  buy  blacks  in  Africa  and  bring  them  to 
the  United  States  was  not  piracy ;  in  order  to  secure  a  con 
viction  under  this  decision  it  must  be  proved  that  the  pris 
oner  had  actually  helped  steal  and  enslave  the  blacks  on  the 
African  shores  before  embarkation.  In  Alabama  in  the 
same  court  Judge  Jones  declared  that  under  the  United  States 
law  it  was  not  piracy  to  buy  and  hold  in  slavery  lately  im 
ported  blacks  after  they  had  once  gotten  into  the  country. 
How  short  the  step  from  these  decisions  to  a  declaration  by 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  79 

the  United  States  Supreme  Court  affirming  them  !  and  this 
was  precisely  what  was  feared  by  many,  that  the  admin 
istration  was  getting  ready  for  the  opening  of  the  slave  trade 
through  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States.  In  the 
face  of  actual  facts,  the  pious  sentences  of  the  President's 
annual  message  were  not  taken  seriously.1 

In  the  North  practically  all  parties  united  in  condemning 
the  inhuman  traffic,  Republicans,  Democrats,  and  Aboli 
tionists  ;  but  while  the  Democrats  generally  refrained  from 
attacking  the  administration  policy  openly,  the  Republicans 
and  Abolitionists  subjected  it  to  bitter  criticism.  The  slave- 
breeding  Border  states  for  economic  reasons  stood  with  the 
Republicans  in  favor  of  the  strict  enforcement  of  the  law. 
Although  proslavery,  they  desired  to  restrict  the  supply  of 
slaves  in  order  to  keep  up  prices ;  additional  Africans  would 
increase  the  supply  and  cheapen  prices.  The  extreme  South, 
and  especially  the  growing  Southwest,  on  economic  grounds, 
took  the  opposite  position;  there  were  mineral  deposits  to 
open,  virgin  fields  yet  to  bring  under  cultivation,  broad 
acres,  then  under  foreign  flags,  perhaps  soon  to  be  annexed 
and  claimed  to  slavery.  To  develop  these  resources  the 
labor  supply  should  be  increased,  not  diminished ;  the  foreign 
slave  trade  should  be  legalized,  not  prohibited.  This  was 
the  almost  unanimous  position  of  the  Southern  Commercial 
Convention,  held  in  Vicksburg,  Mississippi,  in  1859,  and  of 
thirty  or  more  Mississippi  newspapers.  By  reopening  the 

1  It  should  be  added  that  in  October,  1860,  the  part  owner  of  the  ship 
Orion  was  convicted  in  Boston  of  engaging  in  the  slave  trade  and  sen 
tenced  to  two  years  in  jail  and  to  pay  a  fine  of  $2000 ;  the  first  mate  got 
two  years  in  jail  and  the  second  mate  twenty-one  months.  This  was  the 
work  of  a  Northern  jury;  no  Southern  jury  ever  convicted.  One  ruse 
employed  by  an  American  trader  was  to  carry  two  crews  and  two  sets  of 
officers,  American  and  foreign,  generally  Spanish  or  Portuguese ;  then,  if 
captured  by  an  American  ship,  it  would  be  claimed  that  the  crew  and 
officers  were  foreign  and  the  boat  foreign  also,  the  Americans  being  merely 
passengers;  if  captured  by  the  English,  the  opposite  claim  would  be 
made. 


80  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

4) 

trade  the  large  class  of  poor  whites,  too  poor  to  own  slaves, 
might  be  drawn  over  to  the  side  of  slavery ;  their  farms  were 
small  and  were  gradually  growing  smaller  under  the  encroach 
ments  of  the  large  landholders.  Cheapen  the  price  of  slaves, 
and  these  thousands  of  small  holders,  thus  enabled  to  own 
blacks,  would  be  enlisted  in  the  defense  of  the  institution. 
Slavery  was  now  proving  a  blessing;  why  not,  therefore, 
erase  from  the  statute  books  a  law  enacted  when  the  South 
still  believed  slavery  to  be  a  curse?  "I  tell  you,  fellow 
Democrats,"  said  a  prominent  Georgian  in  the  national 
Democratic  convention  at  Charleston,  South  Carolina, 
"that  the  African  slave  trader  is  the  true  Union  man.  I 
tell  you  that  the  slave  trade  of  Virginia  is  more  immoral, 
more  unchristian,  in  every  possible  point  of  view,  than  the 
African  slave  trade,  which  goes  to  Africa  and  brings  a  heathen 
and  worthless  man  here  and  makes  him  a  useful  man,  Chris 
tianizes  him,  and  sends  him  and  his  posterity  down  the  stream 
of  time  to  join  in  the  blessings  of  civilization."  It  was 
certainly  right  to  go  to  Africa  and  get  a  slave  for  a  few  dollars, 
if  it  was  right  to  go  to  Virginia  and  get  one  for  two  thousand 
dollars. 

An  unexpected  event  served  to  bring  the  discussion  to  a 
head.  Three  slavers,  seized  with  their  cargoes  in  Cuban 
waters,  were  taken  by  their  American  captors,  contrary  to 
their  custom,  not  to  Liberia,  for  that  was  at  the  moment 
impracticable  in  the  wretched  condition  of  the  slaves,  but 
to  hastily  constructed  barracks  at  Key  West,  Florida.  What 
should  the  nation  do  with  its  new  charges?  An  earnest 
debate  followed.  Bring  the  fifteen  hundred  Africans  to  the 
North,  said  some,  and  let  them  find  homes  and  work  there 
as  free  men ;  put  them  to  work  as  slaves  on  the  Southern 
railroads,  said  others ;  still  others  would  have  them  let  out 
as  apprentices.  By  a  state  law  no  free  negro  could  be  brought 
into  the  state  of  Florida ;  why  not,  then,  pass  a  Northern 
" Personal  Liberty"  law  in  the  state  legislature,  queried  a 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  81 

local  Florida  paper,  annul  the  national  slave  trade  law,  make 
it  a  crime  to  carry  out  this  national  law,  and  imprison  all 
who  attempted  to  carry  the  Key  West  Africans  out  of  the 
state  ?  If  a  slave  becomes  a  free  man  by  going  North,  why 
not  let  the  South  act  on  the  opposite  principle  that  a  negro, 
coming  into  the  South,  becomes  a  slave? 

In  the  conflict  of  opinions,  the  President  determined  for 
himself.  He  felt  bound  by  the  law  of  1819,  authorizing  him 
to  provide  for  the  safe  keeping,  support,  and  removal  of  such 
negroes  from  the  United  States,  and  to  appoint  an  agent  to 
receive  them  in  Africa  and  aid  them ;  President  Monroe  had 
so  interpreted  the  law,  and  so  it  had  been  interpreted  by 
President  Buchanan  himself  two  years  earlier.  Therefore, 
Congress,  at  the  President's  request,  passed  an  act  appro 
priating  two  hundred  and  twenty-five  thousand  dollars  for 
the  purpose,  and  after  special  agreement  between  the  Presi 
dent  and  the  American  Colonization  Society  the  negroes  were 
carried  away  to  Africa  under  the  auspices  of  the  latter 
organization.  There  they  were  to  be  assisted  for  one  year, 
with  the  privileges  of  citizenship,  means  of  education,  and 
chances  to  make  their  own  living  freely  given  them  under 
Christian  influences.  Probably  out  of  the  fifteen  hundred 
who  were  landed  at  Key  West  few  over  one  thousand  reached 
Liberia;  three  hundred  died  in  Florida  and  some  on  the 
voyage  to  Africa.1 

In  striking  contrast  to  this  prominence  of  the  foreign 
slave  trade  in  the  mind  of  the  North,  was  the  actual  dearth 
of  news  as  to  the  domestic  slave  trade.  The  abolitionists 
continued  to  pass  their  usual  resolutions  against  the  inter 
state  traffic,  but  the  news  items  on  the  subject  in  their  own 

1  It  was  rumored  that  many  of  the  three  hundred  who  "  died  "  at  Key 
West  were  in  reality  stolen ;  but  this  could  not  be  proved.  It  was  the 
custom  of  the  British  to  set  the  captured  Africans  and  crew  at  liberty,  to 
destroy  the  vessel,  and  to  send  the  liberated  Africans  to  the  British  West 
Indies  to  serve  as  apprentices. 
Q 


82  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

% 

papers,  and  indeed  in  the  press  in  general,  scarcely  mentioned 
details,  and  in  the  public  presentation  of  slavery  in  the 
North  the  interstate  trade  held  a  relatively  unimportant 
position.  Fugitive  and  obscure  notices  in  the  St.  Louis 
papers  mentioned  the  trade  at  that  point,  where  "  scarcely 
a  day  passes  but  gangs  of  these  unfortunate  creatures  are 
seen,  trailing  in  couples,  with  drivers  in  the  front  and  in  the 
rear,  down  the  principal  streets  leading  to  the  river.  Mis 
souri  is  undoubtedly  being  depleted  of  her  young  and  vig 
orous  slaves. "  A  certain  trader  was  authority  for  the  state 
ment  that  from  Virginia,  North  Carolina,  and  Tennessee, 
one  hundred  thousand  slaves  were  taken  annually  into  the 
Southwest.  If  the  trade  was  thus  vigorous,  while  the  notices 
of  it  in  the  papers  were  meager,  the  inference  is  that  it  was 
carried  on  under  fairly  favorable  conditions.1 

The  problem  of  the  free  negro  was  ever  present.  Scarcely 
above  the  slaves  in  social  position,  and  in  many  respects 
more  feared  and  despised,  this  neglected  class,  like  their 
enslaved  brothers,  suffered  the  vengeance  of  the  Southern 
reaction  roused  by  John  Brown.  They  were  a  lazy,  worth 
less,  vagabond  set,  always  ready  to  be  tampered  with  by 
the  Northern  John  Browns,  and  always  themselves  ready  to 
tamper  with  slaves  and  aid  in  their  escape.  At  the  begin 
ning  of  the  year,  while  the  story  of  the  white  exiles  from 
Berea,  Kentucky,  was  filling  the  public  mind,  forty  blacks 
arrived  in  Cincinnati  from  Arkansas  with  an  even  more 
piteous  appeal ;  on  pain  of  being  made  slaves  if  they  remained 
in  their  homes  after  January  1,  1860,  they  had  been  driven 
away  as  exiles.  Where  could  they  go  ? 

Laws  against  free  negroes  were  of  long  standing,  and  while 
at  every  reenactment  they  were  made  more  severe,  the 
severity  now  seemed  redoubled.  The  Missouri  legislature, 

1  For  the  statements  in  this  paragraph  the  authorities  are  the  Northern 
newspapers,  together  with  the  large  collection  of  local  Southern  papers  in 
the  Library  of  Congress  at  Washington. 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  83 

copying  the  Arkansas  act,  passed  a  bill  declaring  first,  that 
there  could  be  no  emancipation  of  slaves  in  that  state  unless 
the  master  gave  bond  of  two  thousand  dollars  that  the  freed 
negroes  would  leave  the  state ;  second,  that  every  free  negro 
or  mulatto  over  eighteen  should  leave  the  state  before  the 
next  September  or  be  sold  at  public  auction  as  a  slave  for 
life;  third,  that  all  free  negroes  under  eighteen  should  be 
bound  as  apprentices  till  they  were  twenty-one,  when  they 
must  leave ;  and  fourth,  that  every  free  negro  coming  into 
the  state  after  the  next  September  should  be  reduced  to 
slavery  if  he  remained  over  twenty-four  hours.  On  constitu 
tional  grounds  the  Governor  of  the  state  vetoed  this  bill,  thus 
establishing  a  precedent  that  was  in  a  short  time  followed 
by  the  Governor  of  Florida  in  vetoing  a  similar  bill  passed 
by  the  legislature  of  that  state.  Maryland  enacted  the  same 
measure  and  submitted  it  to  the  people  for  their  approval 
or  disapproval  at  the  coming  presidential  election ;  the  same 
was  attempted  and  passed  through  a  single  house  of  the  Legis 
lature  in  Kentucky,  Tennessee,  and  Mississippi,  but  failed 
of  final  enactment  in  each  case.  Not  only  humanity  and 
progressive  civilization  stood  in  the  way,  but  also  the  plain 
provisions  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  which 
guaranteed  a  speedy  and  public  trial,  by  an  impartial  jury, 
for  all  crimes  except  in  cases  of  impeachment,  and  declared 
that  no  person  should  be  deprived  of  life,  liberty,  or  property 
without  due  process  of  law;  the  same  provisions  were  in 
the  majority  of  the  state  constitutions.  Yet  the  fact  stands 
out  that  in  spite  of  these  great  legal  principles  six  Southern 
states  attempted  arbitrarily  to  make  slaves  of  free  men. 
Certainly  the  excitement  and  the  provocation  must  have 
been  great. 

South  Carolina  accomplished  the  same  end  by  different 
means.  After  August  every  free  black  in  the  state  was 
required  to  have  a  guardian  or  trustee,  who  would  enter 
him  in  the  tax  assessments  as  his  property ;  a  copper  badge, 


84  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

with  a  number  attached,  was  to  be  the  outward  sign  of  the 
new  relationship.  Without  a  trustee,  a  negro  would  be  sold ; 
without  a  badge,  he  would  be  fined  and  imprisoned.  If  the 
trustee  proved  avaricious  and  sold  his  charge  or  disposed  of 
the  property,  there  could  be  no  redress.  With  this  fate 
impending,  nearly  a  thousand  negroes  left  Charleston  alone 
for  New  York  and  Philadelphia  within  three  months'  time. 
In  Philadelphia  one  copper  plate  which  read,  "  Charleston 
1860  —  servant  1243,"  aroused  much  interest.  In  several 
states  free  negroes  were  allowed  voluntarily  to  enslave 
themselves,  and,  strange  as  it  may  seem,  the  papers  chroni 
cled  instances  of  servitude  under  these  laws  by  the  victim's 
own  free  will. 

Older  laws  on  the  subject  of  the  free  negroes  of  the  South 
were  brought  to  the  attention  of  the  Northern  public,  such 
as  those  in  Virginia  requiring  sale  at  public  auction  for  non 
payment  of  taxes  and  for  conviction  for  crime,  or  those  in 
Texas  requiring  the  same  for  all  free  negroes  entering  the 
state.  This  last  provision  against  the  incoming  of  free 
negroes  from  one  state  into  another  was  general  in  the 
South. 

j^At  least  three  Northern  states,  Indiana,  Illinois,  and  Ore 
gon,  by  law  prohibited  free  negroes  from  entering  their 
borders,  and  all  other  Northern  states  were  at  least  chary 
in  their  welcome.  Here  was  inconsistency.  Negroes  were 
loved,  but  at  a  distance.  By  almost  universal  custom 
militia  service  and  jury  duty  were  forbidden  them ;  they 
were  not  wanted  in  the  passenger  coaches,  sleeping  cars, 
steamboats,  and  street  cars,  and  when  they  ventured  across 
these  portals  they  were  usually  ejected ;  there  were  separate 
schools  for  their  children,  and  when  by  law  they  were  allowed 
to  send  their  children  to  school  along  with  the  white  childreX 
the  latter  most  strenuously  objected  to  sitting  in  the  school 
room  near  them.  Outside  of  Connecticut,  they  could  vote 
under  certain  restrictions  in  all  New  England  and  in  New 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  85 

York,  but  in  Connecticut  and  several  Western  states  the 
ballot  was  refused  them. 

For  the  free  negroes,  then,  of  whom  there  were  over  a 
half  million  in  the  nation,  what  should  be  done  ?  The  old 
sentiment  in  favor  of  colonization  seemed  to  regain  some  of 
its  former  strength,  without  accomplishing  anything  more 
definite,  however,  than  had  been  accomplished  in  the  past. 
Pointing  to  the  pitiful  wretches,  the  North  reviled  the  South, 
the  South  reviled  the  North.  Neither  side  practised  as 
much  justice  as  it  saw  fit  to  require  of  the  other. 

The  discord  in  the  Christian  churches  of  the  land  over  the 
prevailing  question  may  well  be  imagined.  Should  these 
organizations  denounce  slavery  and  exclude  slaveholders 
from  their  fellowship,  or  should  they  not  ?  The  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church  in  particular,  with  its  closely  knit  organi 
zation  and  large  annual  gatherings  North  and  South,  was 
brought  face  to  face  with  the  inevitable  question.  Swept 
along  by  a  tide  of  prosperity  during  the  first  part  of  the  cen 
tury,  it  had  closed  its  eyes  to  its  antislavery  beginnings  and 
remained  peaceful,  with  slaveholders  and  nonslaveholders 
in  its  ranks,  until  the  abolition  upheavals  of  1830-1840; 
then  several  annual  conferences,  after  hot  debate,  disciplined 
members  for  militant  antislavery ;  in  1840  an  antislavery 
wing,  the  Wesleyan  Methodist  Church,  split  off  from  the 
mother  church,  and  finally  in  1844,  in  the  year  of  the  exciting 
presidential  election  just  preceding  the  Mexican  war,  came 
the  memorable  schism  which  resulted  in  the  Methodist 
Church  North  and  the  Methodist  Church  South,  two  separate 
organizations.  In  this  first  great  rupture  the  dividing  issue 
was  not  an  antislavery  test  for  membership,  but  the  broader 
question  as  to  whether  or  not  a  presiding  Bishop  should  be 
allowed  to  hold  slaves.  While  the  proslavery  wing  in  its 
narrow  field  at  once  enjoyed  peace  and  prosperity,  the  same 
was  not  true  of  its  Northern  sister,  for  the  proslavery 
" Border  Conferences"  in  Delaware,  Maryland,  the  District 


86  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

of  Columbia,  Virginia,  Kentucky,  Missouri,  and  Arkansas  still 
remained  in  the  old  church,  and  peace  was  short-lived.  In 
the  exciting  presidential  year  of  1856  the  church  a  second 
time  faced  the  issue,  the  North  in  general  opposing  slavery 
and  the  Border  states  favoring  it.  Nothing  was  decided, 
and  again,  a  third  time,  in  the  presidential  year  of  1860,  the 
denomination  came  together  in  general  conference  to  discuss 
the  ever-recurring  question.  The  picture  may  easily  be 
drawn.  Individual  churches,  in  the  preaching  services, 
in  the  Sunday  Schools,  and  in  the  prayer  meetings  debated 
pro  and  con  the  instructions  to  be  given  to  the  quarterly 
conferences,  these  in  turn  were  forced  to  frame  instructions 
to  the  annual  conferences,  and  these  to  the  general  confer 
ence  ;  the  religious  weeklies  of  the  denomination  took  sides ; 
and  from  one  end  to  the  other  the  largest  church  of  the  North 
sat  in  judgment  on  the  most  fundamental  social  institution 
of  sister  states.  That  the  picture  is  not  overdrawn  is  evi 
denced  by  the  many  references  in  the  daily  press. 

For  four  weeks  the  great  conference  at  Buffalo  wrestled 
with  the  petitions  of  the  contending  factions  and  at  last 
adopted  a  rule  in  the  General  Rules  of  the  Societies  to 
forbid  "the  buying,  selling,  or  holding  of  men,  women,  and 
children  with  an  intention  to  enslave  them";  heretofore 
only  the  "  buy  ing  and  selling"  had  been  prohibited;  now 
the  word  " holding"  was  added.1  Similarly  a  chapter  in 
the  Book  of  Discipline  was  amended  to  read:  li Question. 
What  shall  be  done  for  the  extirpation  of  the  evil  of  slavery  ? 
Answer.  We  declare  that  we  are  as  much  as  ever  convinced 
of  the  great  evil  of  slavery.  We  believe  that  the  buying, 
selling,  or  holding  of  human  beings  as  chattels  is  inconsistent 

1  The  committee  received  memorials  against  a  change  from  32  annual 
conferences,  signed  by  3999  memorialists  and  39  quarterly  conferences; 
for  a  change  and  extirpation  of  slavery  there  were  petitions  from  33 
annual  conferences,  signed  by  45,857  people  and  49  quarterly  conferences. 
There  was  some  bitter  debate  in  the  quarterly  and  annual  conferences. 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  87 

with  the  Golden  Rule,  and  with  that  rule  in  our  discipline 
which  requires  all  that  desire  to  continue  among  us  'to  do 
no  harm  and  to  avoid  evil  of  every  kind/  We,  therefore, 
affectionately  admonish  all  our  preachers  and  people  to  keep 
themselves  from  this  great  evil,  and  to  seek  its  extirpation 
by  all  lawful  Christian  means."  The  new  rule  was  to  be 
only  advisory,  not  statutory.  Thus,  although  antislavery 
won  the  day,  the  triumph  was  far  from  complete,  for  the 
slaveholders  were  not  yet  positively  prohibited  from  mem 
bership  in  the  church. 

Factions  of  the  Baptist  Church  and  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  were  also  at  variance  one  with  another  on  the  never- 
dying  question,  although  the  issue  was  not  now  so  acute 
in  these  denominations  as  among  the  Methodists.  The 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  seemed  strongly  proslavery, 
as  was  shown  by  the  action  of  a  large  diocesan  convention 
of  the  Church  in  New  York  City,  in  refusing  to  condemn 
even  the  slave  trade.  Some  smaller  denominations  were 
already  positively  excluding  slaveholders  from  membership, 
notably  the  United  Presbyterians  with  fifty  thousand  mem 
bers,  the  Freewill  Baptists  with  sixty  thousand  members, 
the  United  Brethren  in  Christ  with  eighty  thousand,  and  the 
Wesleyan  Methodists  with  twenty  thousand;  hundreds  of 
individual  Congregational  churches  also  were  on  the  same 
side. 

The  large  interdenominational  benevolent  organizations 
fell  victims  of  the  same  spirit  of  strife.  Neither  the  American 
Sunday  School  Union  nor  the  American  Tract  Society  nor 
the  American  Board  of  Commissioners  for  Foreign  Missions 
could  be  deemed  truly  Christian  brotherhoods  if  acceptance 
or  tolerance  of  slavery  was  unchristian.  In  the  face  of  most 
bitter  comment  and  possibly  to  the  detriment  of  its  work 
in  foreign  lands,  the  last-named  body  refused  to  commit 
itself  on  slavery  one  way  or  the  other,  and  continued  to  re 
tain  slaveholders  in  membership  until  its  friends  and  sup- 


88  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

porters  began  visibly  to  fall  off ;  not  till  late  in  the  year  1860 
did  it  bring  itself  to  denounce  the  slave  trade.  Such  a  lead 
ing  individual  organization  as  Plymouth  Church,  Brooklyn, 
rejected  the  determined  stand  of  its  distinguished  pastor, 
Henry  Ward  Beecher,  and  in  a  most  bitter  and  excit 
ing  annual  meeting,  thrice  adjourned,  departed  from  its 
long  custom  by  withholding  a  part  of  its  missionary  collec 
tions  from  the  same  society.  The  American  Tract  Society 
of  New  York,  the  proslavery  branch  of  the  original  society,1 
suffered  almost  perpetual  persecution  and  ridicule,  at  the 
hands  of  Horace  Greeley  in  the  New  York  Tribune  and  of 
Henry  Ward  Beecher  in  the  New  York  Independent,  for  its 
mutilation  of  tracts  in  favor  of  the  South.  One  example 
follows.  Gurney's  Habitual  Exercise  of  Love  toward  God 
contains  these  words:  "If  this  love  had  always  pre 
vailed,  where  would  have  been  the  sword  of  the  crusader? 
where  the  odious  system  which  permits  to  man  property  in 
his  fellow-man,  and  converts  rational  beings  into  marketable 
chattels?"  These  last  two  clauses  were  printed  by  the 
society  to  read:  "Where  the  tortures  of  the  Inquisition? 
where  every  system  of  oppression  and  wrong  by  which  he 
who  has  the  power  revels  in  luxury  at  the  expense  of  his 
fellow-man?" 

Among  the  important  religious  papers  the  New  York 
Observer  supported  slavery  and  the  South  and  roundly  de 
nounced  antislavery.  Nothing  of  the  great  moral  ferment 
and  revolution,  nothing  on  human  rights  and  liberty,  touched 
its  pages ;  not  even  an  outline  description  of  American  re 
ligious  life  could  be  culled  from  its  pages.  A  fair  inference 
from  it  would  be  that  it  represented  the  Christian  world, 
not  of  the  United  States  of  America,  but  of  far-distant  mis 
sionary  lands.  The  paper  was  dead  so  far  as  the  morals 
of  America  were  concerned.  This  explains  the  contemptuous 
reference  to  the  Observer  by  William  Lloyd  Garrison  in  his 

1  The  American  Tract  Society  of  Boston  was  the  antislavery  branch. 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  89 

speech  in  Boston  on  the  night  of  the  execution  of  John  Brown ; 
it  explains  the  perfect  volleys  of  hot  satire  and  jibe  poked 
at  it  by  the  New  York  Independent  and  the  New  York  Evan 
gelist.  The  former  laid  eight  questions  before  its  thousands 
of  readers  for  every  answer  to  which,  by  the  Observer,  by  a 
simple  "yes"  or  "no,"  it  would  contribute  twenty-five 
dollars  to  missions.  The  questions  themselves  reveal  the 
passionate  nature  of  the  controversy.  "First,  Is  it  wrong 
to  sell  human  beings,  guiltless  of  crime?  Second,  Is  it 
wrong  to  hold  human  beings  as  property,  subject  to  be 
bought  and  sold  ?  Third,  Is  it  wrong  to  separate  by  force 
or  law  husbands  and  wives,  parents  and  children,  when 
neither  crime  nor  vice,  nor  insanity  in  either  of  the  parties, 
calls  for  such  separation?  Fourth,  Have  slaves  an  equal 
right  with  other  persons  to  marry  according  to  their  own 
choice,  and  should  such  marriage,  when  contracted,  be 
held  sacred  and  inviolable?  Fifth,  Has  the  slave  woman 
an  absolute  right  to  her  chastity,  and  is  the  master  who 
violates  that  chastity  guilty  of  a  crime?  Sixth,  Have 
slaves  a  right  to  read  the  Bible,  and  is  it  a  crime  to  forbid 
them  to  be  taught  to  read?  Seventh,  Is  the  system  of 
slavery  as  it  exists  in  the  Southern  states  a  blessing  to 
the  country,  which  should  be  cherished  and  perpetuated  by 
national  legislation?  Eighth,  Is  the  system  of  slavery,  as 
by  law  established  in  the  Southern  states,  morally  right?" 
The  answers  never  came,  and  the  New  York  Observer  was 
brought  into  contempt.1 

Pausing  now  at  this  stage  of  our  narrative  to  survey  the 
popular  conditions  that  succeeded  John  Brown's  raid  before 
passing  on  to  the  politics  of  the  year,  it  will  be  agreed  that 

1  The  editor  of  the  Observer,  be  it  said,  lost  his  position  later  in  the  year, 
and  he  wrote  a  long  pamphlet  in  defense  of  the  position  on  slavery  which 
the  paper  had  taken  under  his  guidance.  It  cannot  be  said,  however,  that 
the  tone  of  the  paper  at  the  end  of  the  year  differed  from  the  tone  exhibited 
during  the  first  of  the  year  under  the  deposed  editor. 


90  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

the  Union  of  the  States  was  truly  "a  house  divided  against 
itself"  and  that  an  "  irrepressible  conflict"  was  agitating  every 
part.  The  one  side  with  an  overflow  of  zeal  that  too  readily 
responded  to  the  negro's  Macedonian  cry,  "Come  over  into 
Macedonia  and  help  us/'  sent  John  Browns  to  prey  upon 
slavery  and  hailed  them  as  heroes  for  their  acts ;  denounced 
slavery  in  every  form  and  welcomed  attacks  upon  it ;  and 
held  up  to  scorn  the  moral  character  of  the  slaveholders. 
By  formal  state  law  Northerners  nullified  the  Congressional 
Fugitive  Slave  Law,  the  nation's  pledge  of  fair  dealing  with 
the  South,  and  with  alacrity  aided  the  fugitives  to  flee  from 
their  masters ;  servants  of  Southern  travelers  in  the  North 
were  not  safe.  Too  frequently  Northerners  obstinately 
refused  to  return  to  the  South  its  criminal  fugitives  from 
justice.  In  the  national  Congress,  in  state  legislatures, 
in  courts,  in  public  meetings,  in  religious  services,  in  the 
general  religious  and  charitable  societies,  in  the  secular  and 
in  the  religious  press,  in  books  and  in  countless  ways  the  one 
section  persisted  in  dishonoring  that  which  the  other  section 
held  in  honor.  The  South,  with  the  natural  instinct  of  self- 
defense,  repelled  the  John  Browns  with  great  fury,  burned 
the  Northern  newspapers  in  their  midst,  and  infringed  con 
stantly  on  the  freedom  of  the  press  and  of  speech.  Through 
the  courts  the  Southerners  were  threatening  to  force  their 
system  on  the  free  Northern  states  and  to  bring  to  naught 
the  laws  against  the  foreign  slave  trade;  they  persistently 
kidnapped  the  free  negroes  of  the  North  when  the  oppor 
tunity  offered,  and  they  seemed  to  forget  all  modern  civiliza 
tion  in  the  treatment  they  extended  to  their  own  free  negroes. 
This  inevitable  march  of  daily  events  was  fast  reaching 
a  crisis  that  would  settle  the  fate  of  the  Union  or  at  least 
greatly  affect  its  future;  every  day  the  end  drew  nearer. 
It  was  a  situation  that  political  conventions  and  platforms 
might  recognize  but  could  not  control.  The  people  were 
in  command,  and  they  themselves  were  being  hurried 


THE  POPULAR  DISCUSSION  OF  SLAVERY  91 

along  by  unseen  and  irresistible  forces,  now  by  this  seemingly 
small  event  and  now  by  that.  Every  act,  every  expression  of 
sentiment,  every  edition  of  a  daily  paper,  though  a  small 
thing,  was  a  contribution  to  the  swelling  tide  of  the  "  irre 
pressible  conflict"  in  the  " house  divided  against  itself." 
Through  knowledge  of  this  kind  it  is  now  proposed  to  study 
the  political  crisis. 


CHAPTER   V 

THE   DEMOCRATIC   CONVENTIONS 

A  LTHOUGH  it  has  been  found  necessary  to  separate 
•***•  into  more  or  less  distinct  parts  the  popular  presentation 
of  slavery  and  its  discussion  by  politicians,  in  reality  the  two 
were  inseparably  connected.  J Politicians,  bent  on  framing 
their  views  for  the  coming  campaign,  observed  the  same  daily 
events  that  the  people  observed,  discussed  the  same  things 
that  the  people  discussed,  and  like  them,  were  swept  blindly 
along,  helpless  victims  of  the  " irrepressible  conflict.'7]  Their 
utterances,  no  matter  how  abstractly  expressed,  reflected 
the  tense  excitement  that  surrounded  them. 

As  a  result  of  the  policy  of  territorial  expansion,  which 
had  added  to  the  country's  domain  millions  of  acres  at  the 
close  of  the  Mexican  War  and  for  the  most  part  had  guided 
the  councils  of  the  nation  since  that  time,  problems  of  terri 
torial  government  were  now  foremost,  and  a  definite  decision 
was  called  for  as  to  the  extension  of  slavery  to  the  new  do 
mains.  On  this  point  the  Democratic  party  was  split  into 
two  hostile  factions,  between  the  followers  of  Stephen  Arnold 
Douglas,  United  States  Senator  from  Illinois,  who  favored 
popular  sovereignty  on  the  subject  of  slavery  in  the  terri 
tories,  and  those  who  believed  in  the  principles  of  John  C. 
Calhoun,  William  L.  Yancey,  and  Chief  Justice  Taney, 
enunciated  in  the  Dred  Scott  decision,  that  slavery  spread 
over  the  territories  with  the  Constitution.  Historically  each 
position  was  good  Democratic  doctrine,  for  during  the  pre 
ceding  twelve  or  thirteen  years  now  the  one  view  and  now 

92 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  CONVENTIONS  93 

the  other  was  in  the  ascendency.  As  early  as  1847,  imme 
diately  after  the  attempt  in  Congress  to  pass  the  Wilmot 
Proviso  in  favor  of  Congressional  restriction  of  slavery  in 
the  territory  to  be  acquired  from  Mexico,  factions  appeared ; 
Northern  Democrats  almost  to  a  man,  and  a  few  Southerners 
expressed  themselves  as  preferring  Wilmot's  principle  of 
Congressional  restriction,  the  majority  of  Southerners  came 
out  in  opposition  to  any  form  of  national  restriction  and  in 
favor  of  territorial  control,  while  a  minority  of  Southerners 
in  South  Carolina,  Georgia,  and  Alabama,  under  the  political 
leadership  of  William  L.  Yancey  of  Alabama,  stood  definitely 
for  the  principle  that  the  constitution  of  its  own  force  carried 
slavery  into  the  territories.  The  great  Southwest  in  Missis 
sippi,  Louisiana,  and  Texas,  full  of  the  sturdy  reliance  of  the 
frontier,  opposed  Yancey  and  favored  territorial  control  or 
popular  sovereignty.  Differences  seemed  irreconcilable. 
In  the  crisis,  Lewis  Cass  of  Michigan,  a  prominent  candidate 
for  the  Democratic  nomination  for  the  Presidency,  deserted 
his  freedom-loving  associates  of  the  North  and  in  his  so-called 
Nicholson  letter,  with  a  conscious  purpose  to  please  as  many 
factions  as  possible,  brought  forward  a  new  statement  of 
popular  sovereignty  as  a  compromise  platform  upon  which 
all  factions  might  unite.  On  this  platform  he  won  the 
nomination.  He  declared  that  the  principle  of  national 
interference  in  the  territories  should  be  limited  to  the  crea 
tion  of  proper  territorial  governments,  "leaving  in  the  mean 
time,  to  the  people  inhabiting  them,  to  regulate  their  internal 
concerns  in  their  own  way.  They  are  just  as  able  to  do  so 
as  the  people  of  the  states."  1 

After  Cass's  stinging  defeat  at  the  polls,  the  Yanceyites, 
who  had  bolted  the  national  convention  that  had  nominated 

1  This  letter  was  written  December  24,  1847,  to  A.  O.  P.  Nicholson. 
Douglas  pointed  out  that  before  the  letter  was  published,  it  was  handed 
about  for  approval  to  many  prominent  politicians  both  in  the  North 
and  in  the  South.  Others  had  expressed  the  idea  many  times  before  Cass. 


94  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

him  as  the  compromise  candidate  and  had  adopted  the 
st) addle  platform,  became  more  irreconcilable  than  ever; 
two  years  later,  in  1850,  they  opposed  the  celebrated  com 
promise  measures  of  that  year,  in  which  it  was  sought  to 
sink  all  differences,  and  in  the  presidential  campaign  of  1852, 
when  Whigs  as  well  as  Democrats  proclaimed  the  finality 
of  these  compromises,  they  still  stood  apart  and  ran  a  ticket 
of  their  own.  They  were  irreconcilable,  unconquered  and 
unconquerable;  the  schism  seemed  irremediable. 

Another  reconciliation,  however,  was  attempted,  this  time 
under  the  guiding  hand  of  Douglas  in  1854.  In  his  Kansas- 
Nebraska  act,  by  repealing  the  Missouri  restriction  of  1820 
Douglas  now  restored  to  the  South  its  lost  chance  to  secure  a 
foothold  for  slavery  in  the  Northwest ;  he  wrote  into  the  law 
of  the  land  that  it  was  the  "true  intent  and  meaning  of  this 
act,  not  to  legislate  slavery  into  any  state  or  territory,  nor 
to  exclude  it  therefrom,  but  to  leave  the  people  thereof  per 
fectly  free  to  form  and  regulate  their  domestic  institutions  in 
their  own  way"  ;  and  in  order  to  confirm  the  still  wavering 
Southerners,  he  added  to  the  preceding  the  clause,  "  subject 
only  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States."  This  last 
phrase,  the  great  statesman  declared,  was  intended  to  bring 
the  whole  question  before  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States,  where,  if  the  Southerners  were  receding  too  much 
from  the  growing  doctrines  of  Yancey,  they  might  find  ample 
redress.  The  declaration  was  accepted  and  never  was  a  law 
more  popular  in  the  South  than  this  one  of  Douglas.  Rec 
onciliation  of  factions  seemed  complete.  Throughout  the 
country,  North  and  South,  the  Southerners  joined  the  Illi- 
noisian  and  his  adherents  in  praising  popular  sovereignty. 
The  Supreme  Court  decision,  be  it  remembered,  had  not  yet 
been  announced ;  it  was  yet  to  come,  and  there  was  nothing 
to  check  the  flow  of  Southern  oratory  in  favor  of  the  new 
statesmanship. 

Candidate  Buchanan,  in  his  letter  of  acceptance  of  the 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  CONVENTIONS  95 

Presidential  nomination  in  1856,  used  the  following  lan 
guage :  "This  legislation  (the  Kansas-Nebraska  act)  is 
founded  upon  principles  as  ancient  as  free  government  itself, 
and  in  accordance  with  them  has  simply  declared  that  the 
people  of  a  territory,  like  those  of  a  state,  shall  decide  for 
themselves  whether  slavery  shall  or  shall  not  exist  within 
their  limits,  .  .  .  This  principle  will  surely  not  be  contro 
verted  by  any  individual  of  the  party  professing  devotion 
to  popular  government."  Cobb  of  Georgia,  later  President 
Buchanan's  secretary  of  the  treasury,  in  a  campaign  speech 
declared  that  the  will  of  the  majority  of  the  people  of  Kansas 
should  decide  the  question;  he  would  not  "plant  slavery 
upon  the  soil  of  any  portion  of  God's  earth  against  the  will 
of  the  people."  The  Democratic  vice-presidential  candidate, 
Breckenridge,  praised  the  act  because  "it  acknowledged 
the  right  of  the  people  of  a  territory  to  settle  the  question 
for  themselves."  Douglas  himself  in  1860,  referring  back 
to  a  political  speech  which  he  had  made  in  1852  in  Brecken- 
ridge's  home  in  Lexington,  Kentucky,  described  the  Vice 
President's  position  at  that  early  date  in  the  following  pic 
turesque  language:  "I  sttfod  in  the  rain  addressing  those 
people  for  three  mortal  hours,  and  drenched  in  rain,  during 
which  I  described  the  principles  of  nonintervention  and  pop 
ularity  as  I  have  explained  them  to  you  to-night.  Breck 
enridge  stood  by  my  side  and  patted  me  on  the  back.  At 
any  important  part  of  the  speech  he  called  for  three  cheers 
for  the  'little  giant. "  Going  on,  he  referred  in  the  follow 
ing  words  to  a  great  meeting  at  Tippecanoe,  Indiana,  in 
1856:  "We  made  speeches  from  the  same  stand.  He 
(Breckenridge),  having  priority  of  me  as  a  candidate,  spoke 
first,  and  when  he  came  to  expound  this  doctrine  of  non 
intervention,  this  right  of  the  people  to  govern  themselves 
in  the  territories,  I  was  so  delighted  with  his  arguments 
that  I  got  right  up  behind  him  and  told  him  to  '  go  it.'  .  .  . 
(Then  when  Douglas  himself  was  speaking)  On  all  the  telling 


96  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

points,  when  I  was  giving  the  abolitionists  particular  '  Jessie* 
and  bringing  the  Democrats  up  to  the  point,  Breckenridge 
would  stand  at  my  back,  clap  me  on  the  back,  and  indorse 
my  sentiments.  I  assure  you  that  at  that  time  I  did  not 
doubt  that  Breckenridge  was  sound  on  the  dogma/' 1 

This  reconciliation,  now  apparently  so  complete  under 
the  happy  inspiration  of  Douglas,  was  destined  to  be  but 
short-lived.  Within  a  few  months  came  Chief  Justice 
Taney's  revolutionary  declarations  in  the  Dred  Scott  deci 
sion  to  the  effect  that  slaves  were  property,  were  protected 
by  all  the  constitutional  guarantees  of  property,  and  went 
where  the  Constitution  went ;  neither  a  territorial  legislature 
nor  Congress  nor  any  power  could  exclude  slavery  from  a 
territory  because  they  could  not  exclude  the  Constitution 
therefrom.  Straightway  the  slave  states  were  in  an  uproar. 
They  had  given  Douglas  a  trial.  Their  hearts  had  been  set 
on  California  and  later  on  Kansas,  and  in  a  contest  with 
the  North  under  popular  sovereignty,  they  had  lost  them 
both ;  they  loved  their  party,  but  were  now  forced  to  behold 
the  spectacle  of  a  new  and  aggressive  antislavery  organiza 
tion  growing  up  in  the  North  under  the  very  segis  of  practical 
Democratic  administration.  Disaster  after  disaster  seemed 
to  be  piling  up,  and  the  belief  was  beginning  to  spread  that 
it  was  of  no  use  for  the  South  to  continue  further  the  struggle 
with  the  North  for  the  territories  under  the  conditions  laid 
down  by  Douglas,  for  in  any  contest  between  slavery  and 
freedom  the  free  states  were  bound  to  win.  It  was  a  bitter 
confession.  Then,  like  magic,  under  the  spell  of  the  Chief 
Justice,  the  pendulum  swung  back,  the  slaveholders  re 
nounced  compromise  and  turned  to  the  extreme  Southern 
doctrine,  now  given  dignity  and  importance  by  persons  in 
high  station.  Instead  of  settlement  of  the  slavery  question 
by  the  inhabitants  themselves  of  the  territories,  Southerners 

1  For  a  Bell-Everett  treatment  of  the  popular  sovereignty  record  of  the 
Breckenridgeites,  see  pp.  332-335. 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  CONVENTIONS  97 

would  now  have  it  settled  beforehand  and  in  favor  of  the 
South  before  even  the  first  pioneers  set  out.  They  always 
bowed  to  the  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court,  they  piously 
but  erroneously  contended,  but  they  believed  in  bowing  a 
little  lower  when  these  decisions  were  in  their  favor.  The 
Dred  Scott  decision  was  but  the  judicial  determination  of 
the  long  dispute,  promised  by  Douglas  in  the  words,  "  sub 
ject  only  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States/'  and  as 
such  he  was  now  called  upon  to  accept  it. 

Douglas  determined  otherwise.  The  Dred  Scott  decision 
from  his  point  of  view  was  in  no  sense  a  settlement  of  the  point 
at  issue ;  that  case  fixed  only  the  principle  that  a  negro,  as 
a  noncitizen,  could  not  bring  suit  in  the  courts  of  the  United 
States.  For  the  Chief  Justice  to  deliver  learned  and  weighty 
utterances  in  favor  of  the  extreme  Southern  political  prin 
ciples  of  Calhoun  and  Yancey  was  only  to  dabble  in  politics 
-  not  judicial  determination  at  all.  Douglas  showed  that 
no  territorial  legislature  was  mentioned  in  the  record  of  the 
case  and  that  no  territorial  enactment  was  before  the  court ; 
no  one  fact  in  the  case  even  so  much  as  alluded  to  a  terri 
torial  legislature  —  the  counsel  in  the  case  did  not  think 
that  it  was  there  and  did  not  argue  the  point. 

Upholders  of  each  side  of  the  broken  compromise  now 
took  hostile  and  irreconcilable  positions;  but  the  Illinois 
Senator  went  one  step  further  and  angered  the  South  still 
more.  Not  only  was  the  Dred  Scott  case  obnoxious ;  any 
decision  that  the  court  might  render  in  the  future  would  be 
powerless  to  weaken  local  control  of  slavery  by  territorial 
legislatures.  "It  matters  not  what  way  the  Supreme  Court 
may  hereafter  decide  as  to  the  abstract  question,  whether  ^ 
slavery  may  or  may  not  go  into  a  territory  under  the  Con-  AJ 
stitution,  the  people  have  the  lawful  means  to  introduce  it 
or  exclude  it  as  they  please,  for  the  reason  that  slavery  cannot 
exist  a  day  or  an  hour  anywhere  unless  it  is  supported  by 
local  police  regulations.  These  police  regulations  can  only 


98  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

49 

be  established  by  the  local  legislature ;  and  if  the  people  are 
opposed  to  slavery,  they  will  elect  representatives  to  that 
body,  who  will,  by  unfriendly  legislation,  effectually  prevent 
the  introduction  of  it  into  their  midst.  If,  on  the  contrary, 
they  are  for  it,  their  legislature  will  favor  its  extension. 
Hence,  no  matter  what  the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court 
may  be  on  that  abstract  question,  still  the  right  of  the  people 
to  make  a  slave  territory  or  a  free  territory  is  perfect  and 
complete  under  the  Nebraska  bill.  I  hope  Mr.  Lincoln 
deems  my  answer  satisfactory  on  that  point."  The  same 
had  been  held  by  Douglas  and  others  for  years,  but  has  come 
down  to  the  present  generation  under  the  name  of  the  "  Free- 
port  doctrine,"  because  at  that  small  town  in  Illinois  in  a 
joint  meeting  with  his  opponent,  Abraham  Lincoln,  during 
the  Senatorial  campaign  of  1858,  Douglas  was  forced  to 
assume  the  position  prominently  through  the  adroitness  of 
his  adversary.1 

The  Southerners,  therefore,  in  turning  away  from  Douglas 
and  his  ideas,  were  justifying  themselves  on  a  Supreme 
Court  decision,  when  in  his  opinion  there  was  no  such  deci 
sion,  one,  moreover,  which,  even  if  it  did  exist,  could  not 
impair  popular  sovereignty.  They  were  in  error.  They 
should  come  back  to  accepted  Democratic  dogma,  regular 
through  more  than  a  score  of  years.  Douglas  conceded  that 
they  had  the  right  to  change  their  position  from  year  to  year 
if  they  saw  fit ;  let  them  not,  however,  deny  that  his  prin 
ciple  was  good  Democratic  doctrine  and  that  they  them 
selves  in  1856  had  most  ardently  defended  it.  Yet  the 
Southerners  did  make  this  denial ;  they  had  praised  Doug 
las's  position  in  1856  —  this  they  could  not  deny ;  but  they 
contended  that  they  had  never  understood  it  as  Douglas 
now  said  that  he  did. 

In  a  large  sense  both  sides  of  the  dispute  were  in  the  right, 
for  popular  sovereignty  in  1856  and  popular  sovereignty 

1  For  Douglas's  tricky  explanation  of  this  in  the  South,  see  pp.  289-290. 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  CONVENTIONS  99 

in  1860,  that  is,  before  and  after  the  Dred  Scott  decision, 
were  not  one  and  the  same  thing.  In  the  earlier  campaign 
the  element  of  time  was  not  considered  important ;  people 
praised  the  principle  indiscriminately,  whether  they  believed 
that  the  right  began  as  soon  as  the  first  settlers  arrived  in 
the  territory  or  only  after  the  grant  of  statehood.  Conse 
quently  in  1860,  after  the  time  element  had  been  emphasized 
by  the  Chief  Justice  through  the  declaration  that  popular 
control  of  slavery  in  the  territories  began  only  at  the  time 
when  statehood  began,  Southerners  might  well  say  that  they 
had  had  this  distinction  in  mind  in  1856,  just  as  for  six  or 
eight  years  previously,  but  that  they  had  not  expressed  it 
because  they  were  assured  that  the  point  was  unimportant. 
In  the  Southern  mind  their  own  principle  was  as  tune-hon 
ored  as  that  of  Douglas.1 

The  last  clash  between  the  factions  before  the  primaries, 
conventions,  and  discussions  attending  the  national  con 
vention  of  1860  to  nominate  a  presidential  standard-bearer 
was  the  struggle  over  the  admission  of  Kansas  into  the  Union 
under  the  Lecompton  constitution.  Now  in  a  brutally 
concrete  way  the  inevitable  consequences  of  the  two  oppos 
ing  sets  of  principles  were  worked  out  before  the  public. 
All  the  power,  patronage,  and  strategy  of  the  administra 
tion,  all  the  manipulation  that  political  shrewdness  could 
invent,  were  brought  to  bear  to  induce  Kansas,  contrary 

1  Douglas  insisted  on  a  sharp  distinction  between  popular  sovereignty 
and  squatter  sovereignty ;  the  latter  name,  though  popularly  applied  to 
his  principle,  in  reality  was  a  thing  by  itself.  When  Americans  first 
organized  a  government  in  Oregon  without  any  sanction  of  law,  Calhoun 
and  others  spoke  of  them  as  squatters,  and  of  their  government  as  squatter 
sovereignty.  In  the  same  way,  settlers  set  up  a  provisional  government 
in  Nevada,  Dakota,  and  in  Colorado ;  in  the  last-named  place  squatter 
sovereignty  was  in  operation  in  1860,  in  defiance  of  the  laws  of  the  United 
States  and  of  the  laws  of  the  territory  of  Kansas.  Quite  a  different  thing 
was  popular  sovereignty ;  this  was  the  right  of  the  people,  after  the  terri 
tory  was  organized  by  a  law  of  Congress,  to  govern  themselves  till  state 
hood. 


100  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

to  her  own  desires,  to  adopt  a  constitution  that  would  fasten 
slavery  upon  her,  while  all  the  fighting  powers  of  the  aroused 
"Little  Giant "  were  brought  to  bear  to  allow  Kansas  to 
stand  by  her  own  choice.  The  contest  was  the  more  des 
perate  in  view  of  the  close  approach  of  the  next  presidential 
election.  A  new  slave  state  that  for  months  had  seemed 
impossible  before  the  onrushes  of  Northern  freedom-loving 
immigrants,  could  now  be  grasped  at  for  the  last  time ;  now, 
if  ever,  could  the  Southern  partisans  prove  the  popularity 
and  vote-getting  power  of  their  position.  On  the  other 
hand,  Douglas  saw  or  thought  he  saw,  in  the  presence  of  the 
swelling  tide  of  Northern  antislavery,  the  utter  political 
worthlessness  of  the  Southern  idea.  To  make  himself 
president  he  must  not  offer  new  offense  to  the  growing 
Northern  sentiment ;  he  must  not  lay  himself  open  to  the 
charge  of  inconsistency  and  truckling  to  the  South ;  he  must 
stick  to  his  position  and  oppose  the  LQCompton  constitution 
on  the  ground  that  it  was  a  denial  of  popular  sovereignty. 
Expediency  was  keeping  him  true  to  his  record,  but  he  seemed 
a  hero.  By  his  stand  his  followers  in  Congress,  throughout 
the  Northern  states  and  in  Kansas  were  so  invigorated  that 
the  Lecompton  project  was  defeated  and  Kansas  lost  to 
slavery. 

Proof  was  now  irrefragable  that  Douglas  was  the  enemy 
of  the  South,  and  that  section  turned  from  him  forever. 
His  mighty  attempt  in  the  Kansas-Nebraska  act  to  pro 
pitiate  the  Moloch  of  slavery,  temporarily  successful,  in  the 
end  proved  his  undoing.  Seward,  Greeley,  —  no  Black  Re 
publican  could  do  more  damage  to  Southern  interests. 

Growing  out  of  this  battle  royal  over  Kansas  rose  the  per 
sistent  charge  that  while  Douglas  was  hard  pressed  in  his 
late  Senatorial  campaign  in  Illinois  by  the  proslavery  ad 
ministration  interests,  he  had  gone  too  far  into  the  camp  of 
the  enemy  to  gain  supporters  and  had  considered  joining 
the  Republican  party.  Evidence  piled  up.  In  the  parlor 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  CONVENTIONS  :  101 


of  his  Washington  home  the  great  Democrat  frequently 
had  consulted  with  the  Republicans,  including  Greeley,  to 
whom  he  had  said  again  and  again,  "We  could  do  this,  we 
could  do  that."  Letters  and  other  testimony  were  produced 
showing  that  Greeley,  Burlingame,  and  Wilson  of  Massachu 
setts  and  other  Eastern  leaders  had  written  to  the  Illinois  Re 
publicans  requesting  that  they  oppose  no  candidate  to  the 
reelection  of  Douglas  to  the  Senate ;  the  latter  was  free  soil 
enough  for  him,  Greeley  was  reported  to  have  said.  An 
other  declared  that  Douglas  had  said  to  him  that  he  "had 
checked  all  his  baggage  and  taken  a  through  ticket  into  the 
Republican  ranks. "  Lincoln's  testimony  was  cited;  al 
though  as  the  candidate  opposed  to  Douglas,  Lincoln  was 
defeated  he  was  still  glad  that  his  fellow  Republicans  of 
Illinois  did  not  take  the  Eastern  advice,  but  had  preserved 
their  own  organization  with  their  own  candidate.  To  the 
political  efficacy  of  these  charges  against  Douglas  the  hostile 
Southern  press  of  the  time  bears  ample  evidence.1 

This  long  historical  survey,  with  its  platforms,  laws, 
speeches,  arguments  and  counter  arguments,  after  the  organ 
ization  of  Congress,  largely  occupied  the  tune  of  the  leaders 
of  the  Democratic  party  in  the  nation  at  large  and  partic 
ularly  that  of  the  Democratic  leaders  in  the  United  States 
Senate.  President  Buchanan  in  his  annual  message  at  the 
opening  of  Congress  was  first  in  the  lists.  "I  cordially  con 
gratulate  you  upon  the  final  settlement  by  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States  of  the  question  of  slavery  in  the  terri 
tories,  which  had  presented  an  aspect  so  truly  formidable  at 
the  commencement  of  my  administration.  The  right  has 
been  established  of  every  citizen  to  take  his  property  of  every 

1  For  a  strong  speech  on  this  subject,  see  the  Congressional  Globe, 
36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  IV,  App.,  pp.  159-163 ;  also  the  Springfield  Repub 
lican,  March  16,  1860;  the  New  York  Evening  Post,  March  3,  1860; 
The  American  Conflict,  by  Horace  Greeley,  Hartford,  1864-1866,  I,  301 ; 
Abraham  Lincoln;  Complete  Works,  ed.  by  Nicolay  and  Hay,  New  York, 
1894,  I,  592. 


102  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

kind,  including  slaves,  into  the  common  territories  belonging 
equally  to  all  the  states  of  the  Confederacy,  and  to  have  it 
protected  there  under  the  Federal  constitution.  Neither 
Congress  nor  a  territorial  legislature  nor  any  human  power  has 
any  authority  to  annul  or  repair  this  vested  right.  The  su 
preme  judicial  tribunal  of  the  country,  which  is  a  coordinate 
branch  of  the  government,  has  sanctioned  and  affirmed  these 
principles  of  constitutional  law,  so  manifestly  just  in  them 
selves  and  so  well  calculated  to  promote  peace  and  harmony 
among  the  states."  In  the  same  vein  speech  after  speech 
was  hurled  at  the  popular  sovereignty  champion  by  the  most 
eloquent  Senators.  Sometimes  the  argument  followed  the 
logic,  fallacious  and  contrariwise,  of  the  opposing  sets  of  prin 
ciples,  and  here  Jefferson  Davis  of  Mississippi  was  Douglas's 
foremost  opponent.  In  famous  resolutions  which  the  Missis 
sippi  Senator  introduced  in  the  Senate  early  in  February,  he 
embodied  the  Calhoun-Yancey-Taney  principles,  and  pro 
voked  debate  and  strife  for  over  three  months.  An  ad 
vanced  position  was  quickly  developed ;  not  only  did  slavery 
go  with  the  Constitution  beyond  the  power  of  either  terri 
tory  or  Congress  to  eradicate  it,  but  it  was  the  bounden 
duty  of  Congress  to  enact  a  national  slave  code,  which 
should  do  for  slavery  in  the  territories  that  which  Douglas  in 
his  "Freeport  doctrine"  declared  that  the  people  could  or 
could  not  do  for  themselves  by  territorial  law.  This  was  the 
extreme  demand  of  the  proslavery  interests  regarding  terri 
torial  law.1 

At  other  times  the  argument  touched  on  personalities,with 
Benjamin  of  Louisiana  playing  the  chief  role.  In  and  out  of 
Congress  Democrats  and  Republicans  alike  dissected  Doug 
las's  character,  and  with  surprising  unanimity  laid  him  bare 
as  a  self-seeking,  inconsistent,  double-faced  man,  who  could 
be  trusted  by  neither  friend  nor  enemy.  To  go  back  no 

1  For  the  speech  of  Davis,  see  the  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess., 
Vol.  Ill,  p.  1937. 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  CONVENTIONS  103 

further  than  1854  :  for  his  own  profit  in  that  year  he  betrayed 
the  antislavery  Democrats  of  the  North  and  by  a  fair  prom 
ise  deceived  the  proslavery  Southerners.  This  promise, 
when  political  necessity  demanded  it,  he  threw  overboard  in 
his  Freeport  attack  on  the  Dred  Scott  decision,  and  for  a 
short  while  even  pretended  to  draw  near  to  his  Republican 
enemies;  some  charged  that  he  was  the  author  of  the  Le- 
compton  constitution,  in  opposing  which  he  made  such  a 
public  show  of  virtue.  It  was  everything  for  Douglas  and 
nothing  for  principle.1  "We  accuse  him  for  this,  to  wit: 
that  having  bargained  with  us  on  a  point  on  which  we  were 
at  issue,  that  it  should  be  considered  a  judicial  point ;  that 
he  would  act  under  the  decision  and  consider  it  a  doctrine 
of  the  party ;  that  having  said  that  to  us  here  in  the  Senate, 
he  went  home,  and  under  the  stress  of  a  local  election,  his 
knees  gave  way ;  his  whole  person  trembled.  His  adversary 
stood  upon  principle  and  was  beaten ;  and,  lo  !  he  is  the 
candidate  of  a  mighty  party  for  the  presidency  of  the  United 
States.  The  Senator  from  Illinois  faltered.  He  got  the 
prize  for  which  he  faltered ;  but,  lo  !  the  prize  of  his  ambi 
tion  slips  from  his  grasp  because  of  the  faltering,  which  he 
paid  as  the  price  for  the  ignoble  prize,  ignoble  under  the  cir 
cumstances  under  which  he  obtained  it."  2 

Once  again,  however,  in  spite  of  everything,  once  again 
Douglas  turned  his  face  southward  for  propitiation  and 
reconciliation.  Surrounded  by  angry,  ridiculing,  sarcastic 
Southern  senators  he  rose  in  his  place  in  the  Senate  to  speak 
on  his  bill  to  prevent  recurrences  of  the  John  Brown  raid. 
Under  the  Congressional  power  to  repel  invasions,  to  protect 

1  Later,  in  his  convention  platform,  Douglas  in  turn  renounced  the 
Freeport  principles  by  promising  to  abide  by  a  future  decision  of  the 
Supreme  Court  on  the  question.     For  his  evasive  explanation  before  a 
Southern  audience  of  his  Freeport  doctrine,  see  pp.  289-290. 

2  This  is  from  the  greatest  speech  against  Douglas  by  Senator  Benjamin 
of  Louisiana;    see  the  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  Ill, 
p.  2233. 


104  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

each  state  from  domestic  violence,  and  to  guarantee  them  a 
Republican  form  of  government  he  pleaded  for  a  law  to 
enable  the  President  to  prevent  such  invasions  by  the  use  of 
the  troops  of  the  United  States  and  to  punish  the  conspirators 
in  the  courts  of  the  United  States.  "Mr.  President,  the 
method  of  preserving  peace  is  plain.  The  system  of  sectional 
warfare  must  cease.  The  constitution  has  given  the  power 
and  all  we  ask  of  Congress  is  to  give  the  means,  and  we,  by 
indictments  and  convictions  in  the  Federal  courts  of  our  sev 
eral  states,  will  make  such  examples  of  the  leaders  of  these 
conspiracies  as  will  strike  terror  into  the  hearts  of  others, 
and  there  will  be  an  end  of  this  crusade."  He  would  "open 
the  prison  doors  to  allow  conspirators  against  the  peace  of  the 
Republic  and  the  domestic  tranquillity  of  our  states  to  select 
their  cells  wherein  to  drag  out  a  miserable  life  as  punish 
ment  for  their  crimes  against  the  peace  of  society."  1 

Southerners  laughed.  They  knew  the  man  and  would 
have  none  of  him.  The  bill  was  never  heard  of  again.  Re 
calling  the  sedition  act  of  1798,  many  believed  that  the 
proposed  measure  of  Douglas,  if  enacted  into  law,  would 
inaugurate  a  reign  of  political  persecution  like  that  of  the 
days  of  the  old  Federalists.  Hearing  of  Douglas's  speech, 
his  former  anti-Lecompton  associate,  Hickman  of  Pennsyl 
vania,  exclaimed:  "Upon  thy  belly  shalt  thou  go,  and  dirt 
shalt  thou  eat  all  the  days  of  thy  life  !" 

Never  was  a  public  man  subjected  to  such  merciless  criti 
cism  from  within  the  ranks  of  his  own  party,  and  never  did  a 
public  man  under  fire  make  a  more  valiant  defense.  Day 
after  day  the  Senate  Chamber  at  Washington  was  virtually 
the  political  arena  of  the  Democratic  Party,  wherein  one 
candidate  openly  defended  his  claims  upon  the  nomination 
of  his  party  for  the  presidency  of  the  United  States,  and 
eight  or  ten  rivals,  mostly  Southerners,  sought  to  badger  and 
destroy  him.  Contemporary  judgment  inclined  to  the  view 
1  The  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  I,  p.  552. 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  CONVENTIONS  105 

that  Douglas  was  the  superior  of  them  all  in  the  power  of 
argument.  Yet  he  availed  nothing. 

The  die  was  cast.  No  longer  would  the  South  parley  with 
a  Northern  man  with  Southern  principles,  no  longer  com 
promise  or  fall  short  of  insistence  upon  their  extreme  position. 
To  compromise  was  a  losing  policy.  In  1848,  while  Yancey 
and  others  urged  the  extreme  claims,  the  majority  accepted 
a  Northern  straddle  and  were  defeated;  the  compromise 
measures  of  1850,  the  issue  of  the  election  of  1852,  profited 
nothing,  for  California  was  lost  and  the  fugitive  slave  law 
accomplished  little ;  the  bargain  with  the  Northern  leader  in 
1854  on  popular  sovereignty  and  the  Supreme  Court  proved 
a  delusion  and  a  snare,  for  Kansas  was  not  won  and  the 
Dred  Scott  decision  was  flaunted,  the  "Freeport  doctrine" 
enunciated,  and  the  Lecompton  constitution  defeated.  "No 
more  straddles,  no  more  compromises,  and  down  with  Doug 
las"  was  the  new  battle  cry.  The  only  way  to  retrieve  their 
failing  fortunes  before  the  successes  of  Black  Republicanism 
was  to  make  a  final  stand  on  their  extreme  position  and  to 
maintain  themselves  there  at  any  cost.  This,  indeed,  was 
the  only  thing  possible ;  all  other  policies  had  failed. 

Northern  Democrats  stood  aghast  at  the  inevitableness 
of  the  situation.  But  if  they  could  not  please  the  South 
erners,  who  could  ?  Could  Black  Republicans  ?  The  result 
of  the  dilemma  was  apparent  to  all.  Their  hero,  though, 
now  perhaps  in  their  eyes  more  popular  than  ever  because  of 
his  firm  stand  against  the  persecutions  of  the  proslavery 
administration  party,  could  not  be  deserted.  "The  sacred 
right  of  self-government,"  always  Douglas's  leading  argument 
to  independent  and  self-reliant  Americans,  and  all  the  other 
favorite  arguments,  shone  with  undiminished  splendor. 
Why  should  an  American  citizen  lose  his  ability  to  govern 
himself  when  he  crossed  an  imaginary  boundary  line  between 
a  state  and  a  territory  ?  Why  should  not  the  people  who  are 
to  suffer  the  effects  of  legislation,  themselves  legislate  ?  For 


06  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


the  South  to  estrange  their  Northern  friends  was  politically 
unwise;  if  the  slaveholders  were  really  bent  on  a  quarrel, 
why  not  direct  it  against  their  inveterate  antislavery  ene 
mies  for  real  substantial  grievances,  such  as  John  Brown's 
raid,  the  personal  liberty  laws,  and  the  popular  judgment  in 
the  North  against  slavery  ? 

Stirred  by  this  inevitable  and  irrepressible  conflict,  the 
Democratic  party  assembled  itself  in  national  convention. 

The  story  of  the  convention  may  be  briefly  told.  In  the 
/convention  hall  at  Charleston,  South  Carolina,  which  held 
/  three  thousand  people,  on  the  twenty-first  of  April  six  hun 
dred  and  six  delegates  came  together  with  the  power  of  cast 
ing  three  hundred  and  three  votes ;  seats  were  provided  for 
the  national  committee,  for  distinguished  guests,  and  for  over 
two  thousand  spectators.  Caleb  Gushing  of  Massachusetts,  a 
strong  proslavery  man,  was  permanent  chairman.  After  a 
week's  earnest  debate,  which  in  a  remarkable  manner  arrested 
the  attention  of  the  whole  nation  already  greatly  roused  by 
the  undying  popular  discussion  of  slavery fthe  committee  on 
resolutions  reported  three  resolutions :  one,  the  majority 
report,  adopted  in  committee  by  a  vote  of  seventeen  to  six 
teen  (California  and  Oregon  voting  with  the  South  against 
the  North),  provided  for  a  reassertion  of  the  Cincinnati 
platform  of  1856  with  the  addition  of  the  principles  of  the 
Dred  Scott  decision ;  another,  the  minority  report,  provided 
for  reassertion  of  the  Cincinnati  platform,  with  the  addition 
of  a  promise  to  abide  by  any  future  decision  of  the  Supreme 
Court  as  regarded  slavery  in  the  territories ;  and  a  third, 
signed  only  by  Benjamin  F.  Butler  of  Massachusetts,  re 
asserted  the  Cincinnati  platform,  without  any  additions  or 
alterations.  Earnest  debate  in  open  convention  followed, 
and  by  a  full  vote  of  one  hundred  and  sixty-five  to  one  hun 
dred  and  thirty-eight  the  majority  report  was  rejected  and 
that  of  the  /minority  substituted  in  its  place.  Popular 
sovereignty  was  triumphant ;  again  it  was  the  true  party 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  CONVENTIONS  v  107 

doctrine,  but  the  victory  was  so  hollow  that  Douglas  never 
reaped  any  fruits  from^itj 

JSs  soon  as  the  vote  was  announced  the  Alabama  dele-' 
gation  arose  and  left  the  hall,  followed  by  ten  of  the  Louisiana 
delegates,  all  those  from  Mississippi,  Texas,  and  Florida, 
and  a  majority  of  those  from  South  Carolina,  Georgia,  and, 
Arkansas;  and  the  departure  of  each  delegation  was  pre-j 
ceded  by  a  solemn  speech  of  justification  and  farewell.  This 
secession  accomplished,  the  remaining  delegates  proceeded 
to  a  fruitless  balloting  for  President  through  fifty-seven 
wearisome  ballots,  in  which  Douglas  was  always  far  in  the 
lead  of  the  other  candidates,  including,  among  others,  James 
Guthrie  of  Kentucky,  R.  M.  T.  Hunter  of  Virginia,  and 
Andrew  Johnson  of  Tennessee,  without  ever  attaining  the 
requisite  number  of  votes  to  give  him  the  nomination.  Then 
the  convention  passed  a  resolution  requesting  the  seceding 
states  to  fill  up  their  vacant  delegations,  and  adjourned  for 
six  weeks,  to  meet  again  in  Baltimore  on  the  eighteenth  of 
June.  The  Charleston  sessions  had  lasted  two  weeks.I 

Jin  the  meantime  the  seceders,  increased  by  the  addition 
of  a  few  delegates  from  the  border  states  of  Missouri,  Ken 
tucky,  Delaware,  and  North  Carolina,  immediately  after 
their  withdrawal  gathered  themselves  into  convention  in  the 
same  city  of  Charleston,  listened  to  a  few  speeches,  placed] 
themselves  on  record  as  opposed  to  the  adoption  of  a 
party  name  and  to  the  issuing  of  a  separate  platform  oi 
principles,  and  then  adjourned  to  meet  in  Richmond,  Vir 
ginia,  the  eleventh  of  June,  one  week  before  the  reassembling 
of  the  regular  convention  in  Baltimore.! 

In  all  its  history  the  Democratic  party  had  never  been  so 
torn  by  debate  as  in  these  weeks  of  waiting  in  May  and  June  ; 
on  the  one  hand,  the  devoted  Douglasites  of  the  North 
boiled  with  rage  and  anger  at  the  insurrectionists  and  bolters 
of  the  South,  and  passionately  committed  themselves  against 
admitting  them  back  again  into  the  second  convention ; 


L08  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

->  • 

while,  on  the  other  hand,  the  radicals  of  the  South,  with 
their  every  step  fiercely  assailed  by  a  few  still  devoted  Doug 
las  followers,  firmly  approved  of  the  rebels,  reappointed 
them  and  sent  them  as  delegates,  with  few  exceptions,  both} 
to  Baltimore  and  to  Richmond.  Several  contesting  delega-| 
tions  were  also  appointed.  The  country  at  large,  awestruck] 
by  the  disruption  of  the  great  historic  party,  echoed  the 
ominous  words  of  Georgia's  leading  statesman,  Howell  Cobb  : 
"It  cannot  be  disguised  that  both  the  safety  of  the  South 
and  the  integrity  of  the  Union  are  seriously  threatened.  It  is 
my  honest  conviction  that  the  issue  depends  upon  the  action' 
of  the  Southern  people  at  this  important  juncture."  "The 
overthrow  of  the  national  Democratic  party  would  be  a 
gigantic  stride  toward  dissolution,"  wrote  Ex-Governor 
Herschel  V.  Johnson  of  Georgia. 

;  [Seldom  has  the  attention  of  the  country  been  so  fixed  on  a\ 
national  convention  as  on  that  at  Baltimore.  The  expected  I 
happened,  an  irreconcilable  quarrel  over  the  contesting 
Southern  delegations.  On  this  important  question,  by  the 
very  act  of  secession  of  the  Southerners  themselves  at  Charles 
ton,  the  entire  decision  lay  with  the  Douglas  men.  |  South 
Carolina  and  Florida  sent  their  delegates  now  only  to  Rich 
mond;  from  Mississippi  and  Texas  the  original  seceding 
delegates,  commissioned  to  both  Richmond  and  Baltimore, 
after  a  sharp  contest  were  accepted  at  Baltimore  but  refused 
the  preferred  seats;  the  original  delegates  from  Arkansas 
and  Georgia,  sent  to  both  adjourned  conventions,  were 
accepted  at  Baltimore  and  took  their  seats ;  from  Alabama 
and  Louisiana  alone,  the  bolters,  commissioned  to  both  June 
conventions,  were  rejected  at  Baltimore  and  their  seats 
given  to  the  rival  Douglas  delegates.  I  Of  the  eight  dissatis- 
'  fied  states,  two  were  represented  at  Baltimore  and  six  were 
without  representation,  four  of  the  latter  by  their  own  choice 
or  that  of  their  delegates  and  two  by  the  action  of  the  con 
vention  itself.  But  this  rejection  was  crucial,  for  it  precipi- 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  CONVENTIONS 

tated  an  immediate  second  secession,  shared  in  by  delegates* 
from  twenty  states.  The  regulars  then  nominated  Senator! 
Douglas  for  President  and  Senator  Fitzpatrick  of  Alabama! 
for  Vice  President,  while  the  seceders  in  an  immediate  con-fl 
vention  in  the  same  city,  without  waiting  to  go  to  Richmond, 
named  Vice  President  Breckenridge  of  Kentucky  for  Presi 
dent  and  Senator  Lane  of  Oregon  for  Vice  President./  The 
Richmond  convention,  attended  from  day  to  day  T>y  the 
South  Carolina  delegates  and  daily  adjourned  while  waiting 
for  the  results  at  Baltimore,  ratified  the  nominations  of 
Breckenridge  and  Lane.1 

Discussion  of  the  mooted  questions  arising  out  of  these 
conventions  continued  down  to  the  very  day  of  election,  if 
indeed  it  may  be  considered  as  terminating  at  that  time. 
They  were  questions  of  party  procedure  and  convention 
practice,  questions  primarily  for  the  student  of  political 
science,  and  they  are  best  appreciated  when  considered  in  / 
this  light.  The  whole  convention  system  was  at  stake. 

At  the  outset  the  Southerners  boldly  challenged  the  prin-\^ 
ciple  of  convention  representation  in  their  declaration  that  j 
when  the  platform  committee  at  Charleston,  in  which  the 
states  were  equal  because  the  committee  was  made  up  of 
one  delegate  from  each  state,  had  adopted  the  platform, 
this  action  should  not  have  been  rejected  by  the  open  con 
vention,  where  the  states  were  not  equal.     The  action  of  the 
convention  was   controlled  by  states   which  were  morally  *• 
certain  to  cast  no  Democratic  electoral  votes ;  states  which 
were  sure  for  the  ticket  should  not  be  overborne  by  states 

1  A  valuable  history  of  these  conventions  from  the  Douglas  point  of 
view  is  contained  in  the  address  to  the  country  by  the  national  committee 
of  the  Douglas  party;  see  the  New  York  Herald,  July  19,  1860.  The 
Breckenridge  side  of  the  dispute  may  be  found  in  the  address  to  the  coun 
try  of  their  national  committee ;  this  may  be  found  in  the  Boston  Post,  in 
the  month  of  August,  1860,  and  also  in  Vol.  XVII  of  the  political  pam 
phlets  in  Yale  University  Library.  Caucuses  of  1860,  by  Murat  Halsted, 
Columbus,  1860,  is  also  valuable. 


110  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

which  were  sure  to  the  enemy.  Especially  in  a  time  oi 
strained  relations  was  this  unfair.  The  reply  was  equally 
forcible.  A  convention  should  always  control  its  committee, 
its  servant.  To  assume  at  the  very  beginning  of  the  cam 
paign  that  certain  states  were  to  be  lost  was  both  impolitic 
and  unwise  as  well  as  discouraging.  Theoretically  the  exist 
ing  system  had  been  devised  to  do  the  very  thing  that  was 
now  attacked.  In  the  flourishing  time  of  Democracy  from 
Jefferson  to  Jackson,  it  finally  appealed  to  people  as  unjust 
that  only  the  Democratic  members  of  Congress  should  par 
ticipate  in  the  right  to  nominate  the  presidential  candidate ; 
if  a  certain  district  was  not  represented  in  Congress  by  a 
Democrat,  the  Democrats  in  that  district  secured  no  repre 
sentation  in  their  party's  choice.  Accordingly,  at  the  sug 
gestion  of  the  New  Hampshire  legislature  in  1832,  the  Demo 
cratic  party  adopted  the  plan  of  a  convention,  wherein  the 
Democrats  of  all  districts,  whethgr^  in  a  majority  or  in  a 
minority,  might  be  represented.1  ITo  prevent  the  control  of 
the  convention  from  going  into  tne  hands  of  delegates  from 
states  controlled  by  the  opposition,  it  was  decided  that  a 

I'  two-thirds  vote  be  required  for  nomination,  and  thereafter  | 
this  had  been  the  practice  hi  the  national  conventions^!! 

The  manner  of  application  of  this  two-thirds  rule,  whether 
two-thirds  of  the  whole  number  of  delegates  should  be  re 
quired  or  only  two-thirds  of  the  number  voting,  occasioned 
further  dispute.  At  Charleston,  before  proceeding  to  nomi 
nate,  it  was  decided  that  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the  whole  con 
vention  be  required  of  the  successful  candidate,  although  in 
every  Democratic  convention  in  which  the  rule  had  been 
enforced  after  1832  it  had  been  "two-thirds  of  the  vote 


1  There  were  other  reasons  of  weight  for  the  decline  of  the  Congres 
sional  caucus. 

2  In  the  convention  of  1840  there  was  no  ballot ;  a  committee  of  one 
from  each  state  reported  the  nomination  of  Van  Buren,  and  the  report 
was  unanimously  accepted. 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  CONVENTIONS  111 

given "  that  had  been  stipulated.1  In  the  convention  of 
1848,  when  on  the  fourth  ballot  Cass  received  two-thirds  of 
the  two  hundred  and  fifty-four  votes  cast,  although  two 
hundred  and  ninety  delegates  were  present,  including  the 
thirty-six  from  New  York  who  would  not  vote,  that  candi 
date  was  declared  nominated.  It  had  never  been  held  that 
a  full  convention  was  necessary  to  nominate ;  in  fact,  before 
1860,  in  only  two  conventions,  those  of  1848  and  1856,  had 
every  state  been  represented.2  In  extenuation  of  the  change 
of  party  practice  at  Charleston  it  was  pleaded  that  the  step 
was  a  practical  necessity  if  further  secessions  of  the  Southern 
delegates  were  to  be  prevented,  and  for  this  reason,  the  New 
York  delegation,  friendly  to  Douglas,  voted  for  it.3 
_.,  Through  almost  three  score  of  ballots  the  nomination  was 
thus  withheld  from  Douglas,  whose  highest  vote  was  one 
;  hundred  and  fifty-one  and  one-half,  fifty  and  one-half  votes 
'less  than  the  necessary  two  hundred  and  two.  At  Baltimore, 
with  two  hundred  and  twelve  electoral  votes  present,  though 
not  all  voting,  after  the  same  candidate  had  received  only 
one  hundred  and  eighty-one  and  one-half  votes,  twenty  and 
one-half  votes  less  than  the  two  hundred  and  two,  a  unani 
mous  vote  for  him  was  carried  without  any  objection,  it  was 
claimed,  from  any  of  the  two  hundred  and  twelve  votes 
present.  It  may  well  be  doubted  if  in  the  excitement  and 
tumult  of  the  moment  the  chairman  correctly  reported  this 
viva  voce  vote;  probably  more  than  twenty  delegates,  con- 

1  Jackson  would  not  allow  himself  to  be  nominated  by  a  convention  in 
1832 ;    only  the  vice  presidential  candidate  was  then  named  by  the  con 
vention. 

2  For  a  valuable  historical  article  on  this  subject,  see  the  Daily  Missouri 
Republican,  St.  Louis,  August  9,  1860 ;   in  1832  Missouri,  in  1835  South 
Carolina,  Alabama,  and  Illinois,  in  1840  Connecticut,  Delaware,  Virginia, 
South  Carolina,  and  Illinois,  in  1844  South  Carolina,  and  in  1852  South 
Carolina  sent  no  delegates  to  the  national  convention  of  the  party. 

3  It  was  threatened  that  if  this  vote  was  not  passed,  the  whole  South 
would  secede ;  such  a  vote  seemed  to  the  South  a  guarantee  that  Douglas 
would  not  and  could  not  be  named. 


112  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

trolling  ten  votes,  shouted  "no"  only  to  have  their  voices 
drowned  out  and  not  counted.  It  is  to  be  recalled  that  the 
objectionable  application  of  the  two-thirds  rule  at  Charleston 
was  made  after  the  departure  of  the  secessionists,  that  is,  by 
a  convention  controlled  by  Douglas,  and  the  same  body  had 
ample  power  to  change  its  own  rule.  This  was  now  done, 
and  Douglas  was  declared  nominated  by  the  following  reso 
lution :  "  Resolved,  unanimously,  That  Stephen  A.  Douglas 
of  the  state  of  Illinois,  having  now  received  two- thirds  of  all 
the  votes  given  in  this  convention,  is  hereby  declared  nomi 
nated,  in  accordance  with  the  rules  governing  this  body,  and 
in  accordance  with  the  uniform  customs  and  rules  of  former 
Democratic  conventions,  the  regular  nominee  of  the  Demo 
cratic  party  of  the  United  States  for  the  office  of  President  of 
the  United  States." 

Breckenridge  was  declared  nominated  by  only  one  hundred 
and  five  votes  in  a  convention  of  fragments,  in  which,  while 
some  twenty  states  were  represented,  only  five  had  full  dele 
gations.1  According  to  a  strict  construction  of  the  Charles 
ton  rule,  and  in  justice  and  equity  to  the  delegates  who  must 
have  been  overborne  by  the  Douglas  chairman  at  Baltimore, 
both  nominations  were  irregular;  according  to  the  Demo 
cratic  practice  before  1860  both  nominations  were  regular, 
if  the  Breckenridge  gathering  may  be  called  a  convention. 
The  disputes  on  the  point  were  very  bitter. 

It  was  charged  that  the  well-established  unit  rule,  by  whicfi 
a  state  delegation  might  be  forced  to  vote  as  a  unit,  was 
manipulated  to  the  advantage  of  the  North.  The  full 
Charleston  convention  adopted  as  a  rule  that  "in  any  state 
which  had  not  provided  or  directed,  by  its  state  convention, 
how  its  vote  may  be  given,  the  convention  will  recognize  the 
right  of  each  delegate  to  cast  his  individual  vote."  This 

1  To  put  it  at  one  hundred  and  five  is  to  concede  to  Breckenridge  every 
dispute  as  to  the  delegates  and  votes ;  the  Douglasites  put  Breckenridge 's 
vote  at  a  far  lower  figure. 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  CONVENTIONS  113 

break  from  former  custom  released  twenty-four  and  one-half 
Douglas  votes,  mostly  in  Pennsylvania,  New  Jersey,  and 
Massachusetts,  which  by  the  regular  operation  of  the  unit 
rule  would  have  been  smothered  by  anti-Douglas  state  ma 
jorities,  while  at  the  same  time  by  the  enforcement  of  the 
unit  rule  where  the  state  conventions  had  directed  it,  fifty-one 
anti-Douglas  votes  were  locked  up,  fifteen  in  New  York,  six 
in  Ohio,  five  in  Indiana,  etc.  The  rule  worked  both  ways, 
however,  for  after  the  secession  at  Charleston  individual 
Southern  delegates  remaining  behind  could  cast  no  vote. 
President  Buchanan  expressed  the  opinion  that  it  was  this 
want  of  uniformity  in  the  mode  of  voting  that  led  to  the 
break  up.1  If  all  the  states  had  voted  as  units  or  if  all  the 
states  had  voted  by  individual  delegates,  in  either  case 
the  majority  platform  would  have  been  sustained  and  "the 
Democratic  party  would  have  been  saved. " 

To  bolt  a  convention  was  a  recognized  means  of  party 
warfare.  In  1848  the  Yanceyites  seceded  from  the  Baltimore 
convention  and  took  practically  the  same  position  in  1852 
when  they  nominated  their  own  ticket  of  Troup  and  Quit- 
man;  in  1856  the  Alabama  delegation  was  distinctly  in 
structed  by  the  state  convention  to  withdraw  from  the 
national  convention  unless  suited  as  to  the  platform,  and  in 
1860  five  Southern  states,  backed  by  many  local  conventions 
and  widespread  public  opinion,  issued  the  same  instructions 
to  their  delegates  to  the  national  convention.  The  secession 
at  Charleston,  therefore,  was  not  a  sudden  innovation. 

An  interesting  point  hinged  about  the  vice  presidential 
nomination  on  the  Douglas  ticket.  Senator  Fitzgerald^ 
declined  to  serve,  and  the  vacancy  was  filled  by  the  national  \ 
committee  and  not  by  the  convention.  Although  to  many  I 
this  step  was  so  irregular  as  to  constitute  no  nomination  at/ 
all,  it  was  yet  completely  in  accordance  with  party  practice; 

1  Mr.   Buchanan's  Administration,  by  James  Buchanan.  New  York, 
1866,  p.  69. 

i 


114  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

4B 

In  a  number  of  cases  vacancies  in  the  lists  of  presidential 
electors  on  the  tickets  of  both  parties,  caused  by  resignation, 
were  filled  by  the  state  committee,  and  in  at  least  two  states 
the  nomination  to  the  lieutenant  governorship  was  made  in 
the  same  way.  The  inference  was  plain  that  the  power  ex 
isted  for  all  offices,  although  it  was  unique  when  applied  to 
such  a  high  office  as  the  vice  presidency.  Certainly  the 
practice  would  be  followed  at  the  present  time.1 

There  were  objections  to  the  large  number  of  spectators 
both  at  Charleston  and  Baltimore,  complaint  of  their  inter 
ference  with  the  regular  proceedings  of  the  conventions,  and 
suggestions  that  the  number  of  delegates  be  cut  down. 
Common  adhesion  to  the  importance  and  the  rights  of  the 
states  still  prevented  the  predominance  and  the  abuse  of 
power  by  the  national  committee,  now  prevalent ;  but  in 
almost  every  other  respect  the  abuses  of  the  convention 
system  resembled  those  of  the  present  day.  Few  modern 
bosses  have  equalled  the  tricks  and  the  wiles  practiced  in 
these  Democratic  conventions  of  1860.  But  neither  Doug- 
lasites  nor  Breckenridgeites  are  to  be  greatly  blamed ;  they 
were  simply  playing  the  game  according  to  the  rules  as  these 
existed  at  the  time.  The  stake  was  high.  The  only  valid 
unfavorable  criticism  of  the  whole  episode  concerns  rather 
the  time  and  the  circumstances  of  the  practices  in  question. 
Defensible  in  the  abstract,  they  were  certainly  less  defensible 
when  their  influence  was  liable  to  inflame  public  opinion  and 
fan  further  the  kindling  embers  of  secession  and  civil  wa^r. 

A  pertinent  question  now  suggests  itself.  Why  did  the 
Southern  states  after  the  Charleston  secession  seek  to  send 
their  delegates  back  to  the  adjourned  convention  ?  In  view 
of  the  firm  control  of  the  Douglasites  in  the  convention  and 
the  implacable  hatreds  that  had  been  aroused  on  both  sides, 

1  It  may  be  noticed  that  while  Edward  Everett  was  considering  declin 
ing  his  nomination  to  the  vice  presidency  on  the  Constitutional  Union 
ticket,  he  suggested  that  the  national  committee  might  fill  the  vacancy. 


THE  DEMOCRATIC  CONVENTIONS  115 

it  cannot  have  been  expected  by  Yancey  that  his  followers 
would  be  received  back  to  the  extent  of  surrendering  to  them 
the  control,  nor  yet  indeed  can  it  be  said  that  the  imperious 
Yancey  wished  to  repudiate  his  own  acts.  Moreover,  had 
all  been  taken  back,  they  would  have  but  occupied  the  posi 
tion  that  they  occupied  before  the  secession.  Douglasites 
themselves,  also,  could  not  be  expected  to  change  their  posi 
tion  and  principles.  Perhaps  a  desire  to  appear  anxious  for 
harmony  and  peace  may  have  actuated  them.  But  there 
must  have  been  something  beneath  even  this.  It  would 
seem  that  the  Southerners  did  not  expect  to  regain  the  con 
trol  but  that  they  returned  for  the  sake  of  committing  more 
mischief ;  they  would  break  up  the  body  further  by  inducing 
the  border  states  to  join  them.  The  strategic  importance  of 
the  support  of  these  states  was  great.  To  them,  as  to  a 
prize  at  stake,  both  conventions,  regular  and  seceding,  betook 
themselves ;  their  delegations  furnished  the  largest  number 
of  the  new  recruits  to  the  secessionists  in  the  second  with 
drawal,  and  from  them  the  seceders  took  their  candidate. 
If  the  ethics  of  party  politics  sanctioned  the  one  secession, 
they  certainly  would  sanction  the  return  in  order  to  make 
this  secession  larger. 

What  ultimate  purpose  actuated  both  secessions?  Was 
it  a  desire  to  destroy  Douglas  and  his  principles,  or  the  Demo 
cratic  party,  or  the  Union  of  the  States  ?  It  is  certain  that 
the  destruction  of  candidate  Douglas  was  not  the  sole  object 
sought,  for  even  after  the  loss  of  the  platform  this  end  could 
have  been  secured,  under  the  operation  of  the  two-thirds 
rule,  merely  by  remaining  in  the  Charleston  body  and  voting 
against  him  to  the  end.1  Coupled  with  the  desire  for  per 
sonal  vengeance  was  devotion  to  Southern  principles,  and 
these  two  things  together  dictated  the  slaveholders'  course. 

1  Possibly  the  Southerners  were  afraid  to  take  this  chance  for  fear  that 
in  the  convention  they  might  not  be  able  to  hold  all  their  votes  together ; 
a  break  in  their  ranks,  a  stampede  to  Douglas  perhaps,  might  come. 


116  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Historical  perspective  through  the  previous  decade  discloses 
the  existence  of  these  Southern  principles  years  back,  their 
too  frequent  sacrifice  to  the  party  exigency  of  carrying  the 
Northern  states,  and  the  gradual  formation  of  a  purpose  to 
yield  no  more.  Hence  the  necessity  of  destroying  Douglas 
and  all  that  he  stood  for.  Southern  interests,  and  those 
alone,  uncontaminated  by  any  compromise  or  evasion,  must 
be  made  supreme. 

The  death  of  the  party  was  not  sought ;  the  Southerners 
were  too  good  party  men  for  that.  It  cannot  be  denied  that 
Yancey  and  many  of  his  associates  ardently  looked  forward 
to  a  secession  of  the  South  from  the  Union  and  the  formation 
of  a  Southern  Confederacy ;  and  the  opinion  was  expressed 
that  this  goal  was  now  consciously  in  the  foreground,  and 
that  the  destruction  of  the  Democratic  Party  was  sought  as 
a  step  in  this  direction.  This  is  to  attribute  to  the  leaders 
of  party  politics  more  prevision  than  they  usually  possess ; 
they  are  best  looked  upon  as  the  creatures  of  events,  as  op 
portunists.  The  daily  happenings  in  the  wide  world  of 
national  politics  brought  about  secession,  the  realization  of 
the  vague  hopes  of  many,  with  an  inevitableness  that  no 
men  or  set  of  men  could  foresee  or  direct ;  even  the  most 
ardent  secessionists  must  have  been  surprised  at  the  rapidity 
with  which  events  proceeded.  Not  the  death  of  the  Demo 
cratic  party,  then,  nor  yet  the  dissolution  of  the  Union  of  the 
states  was  the  compelling  force  back  of  the  Charleston  and 
Baltimore  secessions ;  the  true  motive  was  a  desire  to  vindi 
cate  Southern  principles,  by  securing  the  abasement  of 
Stephen  A.  Douglas  and  his  principles. 

It  was  a  question  of  how  best  to  serve  slavery.  The  logic 
of  daily  events  proved  that  the  institution  was  in  great  and 
immediate  danger.  The  Northern  Democrats  would  give 
aid  in  one  way,  the  slaveholders  sought  it  in  another. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  REPUBLICAN  CONVENTION 

A  BOUT  William  H.  Seward,  United  States  Senator  from 
/  •*-*•  New  York,  Republican  politics  centered  in  the  opening 
months  of  1860,  just  as  Democratic  politics  centered  about 
Stephen  A.  Douglas.  Each  was  his  party's  intellectual 
genius,  its  boldest  and  most  aggressive  leader,  greatest  orator, 
and  popular  idol ;  each  had  written  his  name  large  in  the 
legislative  annals  of  the  country  in  the  past  ten  years ;  and 
each  now  seemed  destined  at  last  to  receive  that  greatest 
of  all  rewards  to  which  any  American  may  aspire,  his  party's 
nomination  for  the  presidency  of  the  United  States.  The 
leaders7  struggles  after  this  prize,  their  rivals'  desperate  ef 
forts  to  thwart  them,  make  up  almost  the  whole  story  of  the 
two  conventions. 

The  Republican  party  was  more  united  than  the  Demo 
cratic  party.  Still  new,  with  only  one  presidential  cam 
paign  to  its  credit,  there  had  not  yet  been  time  for  jealousies 
greatly  to  disturb  its  national  councils  nor  had  two  mutually 
exclusive  sets  of  principles  arisen  to  rend  it  in  twain.  Ar 
guments  on  the  presidential  nomination,  instead  of  going 
back  ten  years  or  more  in  search  of  historical  proof,  hinged 
rather  on  the  question  of  availability.  Why,  then,  did  the 
new  party,  which  so  loved  and  honored  its  leader,  fail  to 
award  him  the  coveted  honor? 

(  Seward  fondly  believed  that  the  nomination  would  be  his. 
From  the  time  when  he  arrived  home  from  a  European  trip 
late  in  December,  1859,  feted  and  honored  by  the  city  gov 
ernment  of  the  metropolis  of  the  country,  and  greeted  every 
where  along  the  line  of  the  railroad  by  admiring  crowds  as  a 

117 


118  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

40 

great  national  figure,  to  the  time  when,  just  before  the  party 
convention,  he  left  the  Senate  Chamber  in  Washington  for 
his  New  York  home,  he  lived  in  this  expectation.  To  his 
fellow-senators,  and  to  his  visitors  and  guests,  whom  he  en 
tertained  lavishly  throughout  the  winter,  he  predicted  that 
he  would  be  named.  Enemies  as  well  as  friends  seemed  to 
encourage  him.  On  the  one  hand  was  the  almost  unanimous 
love  of  his  own  party,  on  the  other  almost  universal  Southern 
hatred ;  scarcely  a  Southern  orator,  newspaper,  or  convention 
failed  to  denounce  him  by  name  as  the  arch  fiend  of  political 
antislavery  and  to  point  to  him  as  the  next  standard  bearer 
of  his  party. 

Seward's  leadership  rested  primarily  on  the  idea  of  the 
" irrepressible  conflict"  which  he  had  proclaimed  in  a  speech 
in  Rochester,  New  York,  in  1858,  in  words  that  forever  as^'' 
sociated  his  name  with  progressive  and  radical  tendencies. 
"  Shall  I  tell  you  what  this  collision  means  ?  They  who  think 
that  it  is  accidental,  unnecessary,  the  work  of  interested  or 
fanatical  agitators,  and  therefore  ephemeral,  mistake  the 
case  altogether.  It  is  an  irrepressible  conflict  between  op 
posing  and  enduring  forces ;  it  means  that  the  United  States 
must  and  will,  sooner  or  later,  become  entirely  a  slaveholding 
nation,  or  entirely  a  free  labor  nation."  1  This  thought, 

1  The  idea  was  not  new  with  Seward.  Probably  thousands  of  less 
important  people  before  him  had  thought  and  expressed  the  same.  The 
Richmond  Enquirer,  May  6,  1856,  said:  " Social  forces  so  widely  dif 
fering  as  those  of  domestic  slavery  and  attempted  universal  liberty, 
cannot  long  co-exist  in  the  great  Republic  of  Christendom.  They  can 
not  be  equally  adapted  to  the  wants  and  interests  of  society.  .  .  .  The 
war  between  the  two  systems  rages  everywhere,  and  will  continue  to  rage 
till  the  one  conquers  and  the  other  is  exterminated."  In  1853  Henry 
Ward  Beecher  said :  "Two  great  powers  that  will  not  live  together  are  in 
our  midst  and  tugging  at  each  other's  throats.  They  will  search  each 
other  out,  though  you  separate  them  a  hundred  times.  And  if  by  an  in 
sane  blindness  y?u  shall  contrive  to  put  off  the  issue  and  send  this  un 
settled  dispute  down  to  your  children,  it  will  go  down,  gathering  volume 
and  strength  at  every  step,  to  waste  and  desolate  then-  heritage.  Clear 
the  place.  Bring  in  the  champions.'' 


THE  REPUBLICAN  CONVENTION        119 

long  in  the  hearts  and  the  minds  of  men  and  frequently  ex 
pressed  previously,  when  taken  up  and  uttered  by  the  promi 
nent  politician  at  once  placed  the  speaker  at  the  front  of  the 
radicals,  and  as  it  was  passed  about  from  person  to  person 
in  countless  speeches,  sermons,  and  editorials,  it  made  con 
verts  unceasingly.  By  one  happy  phrase  that  would  not 
down,  Seward  became  sponsor  for  political  antislavery. 
He  was  popular  with  the  radicals  as  few  great  leaders  have 
ever  been. 

Soon  he  fell,  ten  years  after  Webster's  seventh  of  March 
speech  almost  to  a  day.  "His  knees  gave  way,  his  whole 
person  trembled";  like  his  great  rival  in  the  Democratic 
party,  he  faltered  before  "  the  great  prize  of  his  ambition/' 
the  presidency. 

Under  the  guise  of  a  plea  for  the  admission  of  Kansas  as  a 
state  into  the  Union,  he  made  an  elaborate  speech  in  the 
Senate  in  the  course  of  which  he  announced  his  presidential 
platform.  Like  most  contemporary  utterances  on  the  sub 
ject  of  slavery,  this  speech  first  rehearsed  the  history  of  the 
contest.  All  was  conciliation  and  conservatism.  Not  a 
sentence  showed  that  the  speaker  ever  so  much  as  thought 
of  the  "irrepressible  conflict";  under  the  fire  of  the  fierce 
charge  the  world  over  that  his  radicalism  was  responsible 
for  the  Harper's  Ferry  raid,  he  refused  either  to  defend  the 
magic  phrase  or  even  to  name  it.  He  tried  to  show  that 
there  was  no  such  conflict  and  need  be  none,  and  that  the 
North  and  the  South  might  live  with  one  another  without 
jealous  hatred.  Instead  of  "slave"  and  "free"  states, 
which  Greeley  said  told  the  story  very  well,  he  coined  the 
phrases  "capital"  and  "labor"  states.  Glowing  pane 
gyrics  of  the  Union  fell  from  his  lips  almost  without  number 
and  saintlike  appeals  to  toleration  and  fraternity,  and 
theatrical  horror  of  Brown's  treason.  The  latter  and  his 
men  were  a  "band  of  exceptional  men,"  "inspired  by  en 
thusiasm  peculiar  to  themselves,"  who  "committed  an  act 


/  120  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

of  sedition  and  treason"  for  which  they  were  "justly  hung." 
Their  death  was  "  pitiable. "<Q:>lavery  itself  was  not  attacked, 
no  sympathy  for  the  slaves  was  expressed.  It  was  a  pas 
sionless  speech,  utterly  ignoring  moral  issue^as  brutal  and 
as  cold  and  as  hard  as  steel,  more  like  StepEen  A.  Douglas 
than  William  H.  Seward. 

A  great  cry  went  up  that  Seward  had  turned  conservative^ 
and  his  radical  friends  began  to  leave  him  as  they  had  left 
Webster  ten  years  earlier.  At  this  day  it  is  plain  that  the 
orator  was  under  the  spell  of  a  fear  of  conservative  reaction 
that  set  in  after  the  Harper's  Ferry  raid,  when  radicals  began 
to  be  afraid  of  themselves  and  became  like  incendiaries  who 
would  help  extinguish  the  flames  which  they  themselves  had 
kindled.  But  the  fear  was  ill-founded,  as  was  shown 
shortly  in  New  Hampshire,  Connecticut,  and  Rhode  Island 
where  the  spring  state  elections  returned  safe  Republican 
majorities.  The  " irrepressible  conflict"  had  not  abated 
one  jot,  and  Seward  should  have  been  acute  enough  to 
realize  it ;  if  he  did  realize  it,  and  still  ignored  it,  he  was  un 
true  to  himself.1 

A  second  class  whom  Seward  failed  to  conciliate,  but  for 

horn  largely  the  renunciation  of  the  " irrepressible  conflict" 
was  made,  were  the  ultra-conservatives  in  the  Southern 
counties  of  New  Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Ohio,  Indiana,  and 
Illinois,  where  there  were  many  people  of  Southern  blood 

d^  sympathies^  These  regions  had  gone  Democratic  in 
1856  and  might  do  so -again  in  1860.  Their  people  hated 
the  " irrepressible  conflict"  arST^fistrusted  Seward  for  his 
contention  that  negroes  should  be  allowed  to  vote;  negro 

1  In  the  spring  election  in  Rhode  Island  the  Democrats  put  up  no  ticket 
of  their  own,  but  joined  with  a  faction  of  the  Republicans.  This  faction 
won  and  the  victory  was  hailed  by  some  as  a  Democratic  victory,  but  it 
was  this  in  no  sense  of  the  word.  After  the  time  of  temptation  was  over, 
that  is,  after  the  convention,  during  the  progress  of  the  presidential  cam 
paign,  Seward  returned  to  the  "irrepressible  conflict"  with  his  old  time 
vigor.  See  p.  213. 


THE  REPUBLICAN  CONVENTION 

equality,  which  the  opposition  with  some  plausibility  might 
argue  that  Seward  upheTcf>they  utterly  rejected.  The  leader 
had  turned  conservative  to  please  them,  but  the  conversion 
was  too  late. 

Thirdly,  it  was  essential  for  the  new  party,  still  unorganized 
in  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey,  but  destined  soon  to  seek 
organization  there,  to  draw  within  its  ranks  the  remnants  of 
the  Know  Nothing  party  in  those  states.  This  desirable 
end  Seward's  nomination  could  effect  but  poorly,  since  he 
had  been  one  of  the  earliest  and  most  persistent  opponents 
of  Know  Nothingism. 

Fourthly,  the  rich  merchant  class  of  the  Northeast  became     : 
conspicuously  lukewarm  for  the  New  Yorker,  after  the  hue    / 
and  cry  aroused  by  John  Brown  began  to  threaten  the  loss  j 
of  Southern  trade.     They  placed  their  own  pecuniary  in-  ' 
terests  ahead  of  the  nomination  of  any  particular  candidate,  / 
on  matter  how  eloquent,  cultured,  and  intellectual  he  might  ! 
be  and  how  devoted  his  following.J 

iThe  corruption  of  the  New  York  legislature,  controlled  by 
Seward's  party  and  bossed  by  Seward's  boss,  Thurlow  Weed, 
was  also  a  heavy  load  for  the  seeking  candidate.  In  Congress 
Seward  was  known  always  to  have  voted  for  the  most  lavish 
expenditures  and  his  administration  at  Washington,  domi 
nated  by  Albany  standards,  might  be  expected  to  be  extrava 
gant  and  corrupt.  How  could  such  a  candidate  avail  against 
the  rottenness  of  the  Buchanan  regime?  The  New  York 
Tribune  called  the  legislature  of  New  York  "not  merely 
corrupt  but  shameless" ;  the  New  York  Evening  Post  said: 
"  Money  is  more  powerful  with  our  representatives  at  Albany 
than  any  consideration  of  law  or  justice."  In  the  West, 
where  the  opposite  reputation  of  " Honest  Old  Abe"  was 
growing  fast,  this  attack  on  Seward  had  much  effectj 
-  (Finally,  though  of  no  little  significance,  Seward's  political 
fortunes  had  to  stem  the  tide  of  the  opposition  of  Horace 
Greeley  and  the  New  York  Tribune,  as  was  made  evident  hi 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

the  post7convention  lamentations  and  disputes  of  New 
Yorkers> 

This  displeasure  of  the  extreme  antislavery  radicals,  of 
the  more  extreme  conservatives  of  the  party,  of  the  remnants 
of  the  Know  Nothing  party  and  of  the  commercial  classes  of 
the  Northeast,  the  corruption  of  the  New  York  legislature, 
and  the  opposition  of  the  influential  editor  together  slowly 
combined  to  create  the  impression  that  Seward,  even  if 
nominated,  could  not  be  elected.  He  had  too  many  enemies; 
the  very  power  and  prominence  of  his  leadership  was  proving 
his  undoingj 

A  host  of  minor  candidates  were  in  the  field,  United  States 
Senator  William  Pitt  Fessenden  of  Maine,  United  States 
Senator  John  P.  Hale  of  New  Hampshire,  United  States 
Senator  Henry  Wilson  of  Massachusetts,  ex-Governor  Banks 
of  Massachusetts,  Speaker  Pennington  of  New  Jersey,  Simon 
Cameron  of  Pennsylvania,  Governor  Salmon  P.  Chase, 
United  States  Supreme  Court  Justice  John  McLean, 'and 
United  States  Senator  Benjamin  F.  Wade  of  Ohio,  Cassius 
M.  Clay  of  Kentucky,  Caleb  Smith  of  Indiana,  Abraham 
Lincoln  of  Illinois,  and  Edward  Bates  of  Missouri.  If 
Seward  could  be  defeated  for  the  nomination,  which  of  these 
was  the  one  to  do  it  ?  What  one  could  best  weld  together 
the  divergent  factions  ?  Upon  whom  could  the  Seward  op 
position  unite  ?  It  was  Seward  against  the  field. 

With  the  party  weighing  such  considerations,  the  candidate 
and  not  the  platform  being  the  chief  issue,  the  time  for  the 
convention  drew  near. 

Seward's  birthday,  the  16th  of  May,  was  the  day  of  meet- 

g.1    The  convention  hall  in  Chicago,  especially  constructed 


1  This  date  was  fixed  by  the  national  committee.  The  call  for  the  con 
vention  was  issued  the  previous  December,  and  unlike  calls  of  the  present 
day,  it  contained  an  enumeration  of  issues  on  which  voters  were  invited 
to  enter  the  party.  This  declaration  was  later  superseded  by  the  regular 
party  platform  adopted  by  the  convention, 


THE  REPUBLICAN  CONVENTION 

for  the  purpose,  held  ten  thousand  people.  Twenty-four 
states,  four  more  than  at  the  Breckenridge  convention  at 
Baltimore,  were  represented  by  four  hundred  and  sixty-six 
delegates;  of  the  slave  states,  North  Carolina,  Tennessee, 
Arkansas,  Mississippi,  Louisiana,  Alabama,  Georgia,  Florida, 
and  South  Carolina  sent  no  delegates,  although  several  were 
present  from  Maryland,  Delaware,  Virginia,  Kentucky,  and 
Missouri,  and,  as  alleged,  from  Texas.  f"So  great  was  the 
Republican  anxiety  to  disprove  the  charge  that  the  party  did 
not  exist  in  the  South  and  was,  therefore,  wholly  sectional, 
that  a  delegation  of  six,  later  shown  to  have  been  composed1 
of  one  Canadian  and  five  men  from  the  neighboring  state  of 
Michigan,  was  admitted  to  sit  for  the  last  named  state.  But 
the  palpable  fraud  deceived  no  one,  for  all  knew  that  not  one 
Republican  vote  had  been  cast  in  Texas  in  1856  and  that  in 
all  the  six  slave  states  recorded  as  present  less  than  fourteen 
hundred  votes  had  been  mustered  for  the  party.]  Delegates 
were  admitted  from  the  two  territories,  Kansas  and  Ne-/ 
braska,1  and  from  the  District  of  Columbia. 

After  the  initial  contest  over  the  Southern  delegates  was 
settled,  a  second  was  at  once  precipitated  by  the  report  of  the 
committee  on  the  order  of  business,  controlled  by  the  anti-  1 
Seward  men,  to  the  effect  that  the  presidential  nominee  be 
required  to  secure  a  majority,  not  of  the  votes  cast,  but  of  the\ 
votes  which  would  be  cast  if  all  the  states  were  present. 
This,  if  adopted  in  the  absence  of  so  many  states,  would 
amount  to  a  practical  acceptance  of  the  two-thirds  rule  of 
the  Democrats  and  would  be  a  blow  so  openly  aimed  at 
Seward  that  its  defeat  by  a  vote  of  three  hundred  and  fifty- 
eight  to  ninety-four  sent  the  latter's  stock  up  very  hi|h. 
There  was,  finally,  a  slight  contest  over  the  insertion  into  theS 
platform  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence.     Apart  from  i 
these  three  contests  and  in  marked  contrast  to  the  proceed-\ 
ings  of  the  Democratic  conventions,  everything  was  harmony.  / 
1  The  Democrats  did  not  thus  admit  the  territorial  delegates. 


124  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

This  was  commented  upon.  In  the  minds  of  all  who  recalled 
the  split  of  the  Democrats  it  was  significant  that  the  rejection 
Jhe  two-thirds  rule  at  Chicago  was  passed  quietly. 

platform   was   conservative.    At^  the  party's   first 

when  it  was  deemed 


j  necessary.- ta- be  passionate  andjrevolutionary  m~~ofo!eF  to 

\  arouse  Jiimr_slajq^  a^ 

'  relics  of  barbarismjji  and  the  prohibitio^ToTlerntoriaTsTavery 

by  Congressional  action  was  strongly  demanded.     On  this 

territorial  issue  alone  the  earlier  campaign  had  been  waged. 

j4Q$ow,  with  the  antislavery  Republicans  in  control  of  prac- 

.  tically  every  Northern  state,  the  revolutionary  work  was 
\j  over ;  the  times  seemed  no  longer  to  demand  sectional  de- 
N^iunciation  and  insults  to  slaveholders^.  Less  than  one- third 
of  the  new  platform  concerned  slavery,  whereas  five-sixths 
of  the  earlier  document  touched  upon  the  subject. t^In 
the  interests  of  conservatism  the  offensive  phrase,  "twin 
relics  of  barbarism"  was  now  omitted,  as  likewise  the 
right  and  duty  of  Congress  to  prohibit  slavery  in  the  terri 
tories  by  positive  legislative  enactment,  though  this  latter 
power  was  not  definitely  disowned ;  there  was  the  colorless 
statement,  to  wit:  "We  deny  the  authority  of  Congress,  of 
a  territorial  legislature,  or  of  any  individuals,  to  give  le 
existence  to  slavery  hi  any  territory  of  the  United  States^ 
The  intention  of  this  clause  was  not  defined  except 
ference  and  weak  statement ;  it  was  confessedly  an  attempt 
at  evasion  and  came  dangerously  near  offering  the  country 
a  weak  solution  of  popular  sovereignty.  Voters  could  see 
that  the  right  of  the  people  of  the  territories  to  control  slavery 
within  their  own  limits  was  not  opposed,  and  that  the  oppo 
site  power  of  Congress  to  exclude  slavery  from  the  territories 
was  not  affirmed.1 

1  Perhaps  the  Republicans  took  this  backward  step  in  order  to  give  no 
aid  and  comfort  to  the  Breckenridgeites,  who  demanded  a  Congressional 
slave  code  for  the  territories ;  for  Congress  to  adopt  this  code  would  be  by 


THE  REPUBLICAN  CONVENTION  125 

The  principles  of  1856  had  contained  no  guarantee  of  the 
inviolability  of  slavery  in  the  states,  but  now  a  clause  was 
inserted  declaring  that  "the  right  of  each  state  to  order  and 
control  its  domestic  institutions  is  essential."  John  Brown 
was  aspersed  in  the  words:  "We  denounce  the  lawless  in 
vasion  by  armed  force  of  the  soil  of  any  state  or  territory,  no 
matter  under  what  pretext,  as  among  the  gravest  of  crimes." 
The  logical  conclusion  of  the  Dred  Scott  Decision,  the  ex 
tension  of  slavery  into  the  free  states,  was  not  met.  All  this 
truckling  (or  conservatism,  as  it  was  called  by  staunch  Re 
publicans)  was  beheld  with  dismay  by  the  abolitionists,  who 
also  searched  in  vain  for  denunciations  of  the  fugitive  slave 
law  and  of  the  existence  of  slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia 
under  the  sufferance  of  the  national  Congress.  The  slave 
^  trade  was  denounced.  New  doctrines,  not  mentioned  at 
^^Philadelphia,  were  included  in  the  demands  for  a  protective 
tariff  "to  encourage  the  development  of  the  industrial  in-  . 
terests  of  the  whole  country/'  for  a  homestead  act,  for  internal  ; 
improvements  of  rivers  and  harbors  by  the  national  govern 
ment,  |and  for  a  continuation  of  the  existing  naturalization 
laws ;  a  *Pa"cific  Railroad  was  again  demanded^  and  the 
corruption  of  the  Buchanan  administration  was  attacked. 
These  questions  of  national  development,  aside  from  the  ** 
transcontinental  railroad  and  the  naturalization  laws,  were 
peculiar  to  the  party.  While  the  opposition  was  concen 
trating  on  territorial  slavery,  the  Republicans,  in  the  interests 
of  conservatism,  were  seeking  to  widen  the  field  of  attention 
of  voters  to  other  issues. 

Between  the  adoption  of  the  platform  on  the  second  day\ 
and  the  ensuing  nominations,  night  intervened,  during  which! 
caucusing  by  the  different  state  delegations  went  on  in  livelyj 
fashion;  those  doubtful  were  addressed  and  importuned  by; 

inference  to  legislate  for  the  territories,  that  is,  to  exercise  control  over 
them.  The  Republicans  may  therefore  have  thought  it  was  not  wise  to 
go  too  far  in  the  direction  of  Congressional  control. 


26  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


various  orators,  including  the  chairman  of  the  Pennsylvania 
state  committee,  William  M.  Evarts  of  New  York,  and 
Horace  Greeley.  It  was  reported  that  the  Republican 
gubernatorial  candidates  in  the  three  critical  states  of  Penn 
sylvania,  Indiana,  and  Illinois,  where  the  Seward  opposition 
was  strongest,  threatened  to  resign  in  case  the  latter  was 
chosen,  while  the  Pennsylvania  and  Indiana  candidates, 
Curtin  and  Lane,  in  person  delivered  earnest  threats  and 
entreaties  against  Seward  to  caucus  after  caucus.  Thus,  in 
the  night  hours  immediately  before  the  delegates  reas 
sembled  to  nominate,  the  anti-Sewardites  delivered  their 
last  blows.  Had  the  convention,  after  agreeing  upon  the 
platform,  proceeded  at  once  to  the  nominations,  instead  of 
putting  off  this  part  of  its  work  to  the  next  day,  many  be 
lieved  that  the  Seward  successes  of  the  day  over  the  two- 
thirds  rule  and  the  platform,  for  the  platform  well  repre 
sented  Seward,  would  have  landed  the  coveted  prize.  As 
it  was,  adjournment  lost  it.1 

On  the  first  ballot  twelve  names  appeared,  on  the  second, 
eight,  and  on  the  third  and  last  only  four.  So  quickly  was 
achieved  one  of  the  saddest  and  most  fortunate  steps  in 
American  politics.  For  the  sake  of  success  the  party's 
representative  man,  the  one  whose  services  doubtless  de 
served  its  highest  honors,  was  cast  aside  for  one  of  less  promi 
nence  and  fewer  enemies. 

f  Lincoln's  debates  with  Douglas  in  1858  had  given  him 
some  national  prominence,  and  a  few  speeches  in  states  out 
side  of  Illinois  had  increased  his  growing  reputation  away 
from  home,  as  for  example,  in  Ohio,  New  York,  and  Connect 
icut;  furthermore  having  beaten  Douglas  on  the  popular 
Vote  in  Illinois  for  the  United  States  senatorship,  he  could 

1  Adjournment  was  probably  secured  by  a  trick.     When  the  time  for 
nominations  came,  in  the  regular  order  of  business,  the  secretaries- re- 
l  ported  that  they  had  not  prepared  paper  on  which  to  enter  the  results  of 
balloting,  and  this  announcement  secured  adjournment. 


THE  REPUBLICAN  CONVENTION 

probably  be  relied  upon  to  do  it  again  as  presidential  can 
didate  in  all  the  Northwest.  His  greatest  asset  was  ob 
scurity.  On  the  national  stage  he  had  not  offended  influen- 
tial  factions  in  doubtful  and  critical  states ;  mutually  jealous 
and  antagonistic  leaders  he  could  easily  unite  because  nothing 
that  he  had  ever  said  or  done,  so  far  as  they  knew,  could  be 
an  object  of  offense  to  any  man.  The  argument  of  avail 
ability  never  received  a  better  illustration^ 

Lincoln's  reputation,  so  far  as  it  went,  was  consistent. 
He  had  never  hedged.     It  was  now  recalled  that  he  had 
expressed   the   " irrepressible   conflict"   idea   some   months 
before  Seward,  and  in  words  just  as  classic  as  those  of  the 
latter.     At  the  outset  of  his  senatorial  campaign  in  1858  l^e 
declared  to  the  convention  which  nominated  him:    "  'A 
house  divided  against  itself  cannot  stand.7     I  believe  this 
government  cannot  endure  permanently  half  slave  and  half 
free.     I  do  not  expect  the  Union  to  be  dissolved  —  I  do  not 
expect  the  house  to  fall  —  but  I  do  expect  it  will  cease  to  be 
divided.     It  will  become  all  one  thing  or  all  the  other. 
Either  the  opponents  of  slavery  will  arrest  the  further  spread 
of  it,  and  place  it  where  the  public  mind  shall  rest  in  the 
belief  that  it  is  in  the  course  of  ultimate  extinction;   or  its 
advocates  shall  push  it  forward  till  it  shall  become  alike 
i  lawful  in  all  the  states,  old  as  well  as  new,  North  as  well  as 
:•*  South."     Throughout  the  ensuing  debates  with   Douglas, 
./planting  himself  on  the  position  that  slavery  was  wrong,  he 
""persistently  endeavored  trraTouse ^  moral  sentiment  against 
the  system,  anoTthis  position  he  never  ceased  to  put  forwa^^ , 
In  the  early  spring  of  ISb'U,  while  Seward  in  the  Senate  at 
Washington,  in  great  fright,  was  doing  his  utmost  to  consign 
the  " irrepressible  conflict"  to  oblivion,  Lincoln  was  travel 
ling  in  New  York  and  New  England,  hammering  away  at  the 
/  sapxe  _oldthoiigLt^QLthe  moral  wrong  of  slavery. 
'*  <At  Cooper  Union  in  New  York  he  expressed  the  belief  that 
uf  slavery  is  right,  all  words  acts,  laws,  constitutions  against 


128  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

•  % 

it  are  themselves  wrong,  and  should  be  silenced  and  swept 
away.  If  it  is  right,  we  cannot  justly  object  to  its  national 
ity,  its  universality ;  if  it  is  wrong,  they  cannot  justly  insist 
on  its  extension,  its  enlargement^  All  they  ask  we  could 
readily  grant,  if  we  thought  slavery  right ;  all  we  ask  they 
could  as  readily  grant,  if  they  thought  it  wrong.  Their 
thinking  it  right  and  our  thinking  it  wrong  is  the  precise  fact 
on  which  depends  the  whole  controversy.  Thinking  it  right, 
as  they  do,  they  are  not  to  blame  for  desiring  its  full  recog 
nition  as  being  right ;  but  thinking  it  wrong,  as  we  do,  can 
we  yield  to  them  ?  Can  we  cast  our  votes  with  their  view, 
and  against  our  own?  In  view  of  our  moral,  social,  and 

J     political  responsibilities,  can  we  do  this?" 
-*^A.t  New  Haven^in  what  was  in  manv  ways  the  greatest  of 
this  series  of  speeches,  Lincoln  said  ^  If  I  saw  a  venomous 
snake  crawling  in  the  road,  any  man  would  say  I  might  seize 
the  nearest  stick  and  kill  it ;  but  if  I  found  that  snake  in  bed 

I  \  with  my  children,  that  would  be  another  question.     I  might 

/  'hurt  the  children  more  than  the  snake,  and  it  might  bite  them. 

Much  more,  if  I  found  it  in  bed  with  my  neighbor's  children, 

^*     and  I  had  bound  myself  by  a  solemn  compact  not  to  meddle 

with  his  children  under  any  circumstances,  it  would  become 

me  to  let  that  particular  mode  of  getting  rid  of  the  gentleman 

\  alone.     But  if  there  was  a  bed  newly  made  up,  to  which  the 

.i,-v  children  were  to  be  taken,  and  it  was  proposed  to  take  a 
batch  of  young  snakes  and  put  them  there  with  them,  I  take 
it  no  man  would  say  there  was  any  question  how  I  ought  to 
act^That  is  just  the  case.  The  new  territories  are  the 
newly  made  bed  to  which  our  children  are  to  go,  and  it  lies 
with  the  nation  to  say  whether  they  shall  have  snakes  mixed 
up  with  them  or  not.  It  does  not  seem  that  there  could  be 
much  hesitation  what  our  policy  should  be.  Now,  I  have 
spoken  of  a  policy  based  on  the  idea  that  slavery  is  wrong, 
and  a  policy  based  on  the  idea  that  it  is  right.  But  an  effort 
has  been  made  for  a  policy  that  shall  treat  it  as  neither  right 


THE  REPUBLICAN  CONVENTION  129 

nor  wrong.  It  is  based  upon  utter  indifference.  Its  leading 
advocate  has  said :  '  I  don't  care  whether  it  is  voted  up  or 
down/  ...  Its  central  idea  is  indifference.  It  holds 
that  it  makes  no  more  difference  to  us  whether  the  territories 
become  free  or  slave  states  than  whether  my  neighbor  stocks 
his  farm  with  horned  cattle  or  puts  it  into  tobacco.  All 
recognize  this  policy,  the  plausible  sugar-coated  name  of 
which  is  popular  sovereignty.  This  policy  chiefly  stands  in 
the  way  of  a  permanent  settlement  of  the  question.  I  believe 
there  is  no  danger  of  its  becoming  the  permanent  policy  of 
the  country,  for  it  is  based  on  public  indifference.  There  is 
nobody  that  '  don't  care/  All  the  people  do  care,  one  way 
or  the  other."  1 

Lincoln  ran  from  nothing,  he  sugar-coated  nothing,  to 
propitiate  enemies ;  neither  did  he  try  to  fool  the  public  by 
hair-splitting  distinctions  nor  to  coax  and  wheedle  the  South 
erners  by  soft  words.  He  "stood  upon  principle,"  and  "lo  !" 
he  was  now  "the  candidate  of  a  mighty  party  for  the  presi 
dency  of  the  United  States." 

The  more  the  candidate  was  disclosed,  the  more  the  radicals 
hked  hlmT^mTe  th^coi!5eTvativesrwith  the  example  before  | 
them  of  the  divisions  of  the  JJemocrats  and  t|ie_everTasting 
possibility  of  secession,  were  not  estranged.  The  Know 
Nothings,  opposed  to  slavery,  freely  accepted  Lincoln,  who 
had  never  opposed  them;  Whigs  accepted  him,  because  he 
had  been  one  of  them.  He  was  not  entangled  with  corrupt 
allies,  nor  antagonized  by  commercial  interests.2 

The  Seward  men,  although  greatly  chagrined  and  grieved, 

1  Abraham  Lincoln;  Complete  Works.   Ed.  by  John  G.  Nicolay  and  John 
Hay,  New  York,  1894,  I,  616.     The  same  gives  the  New  York  speech, 
I,  599. 

2  Hamlin's  nomination  to  the  vice  presidency  followed  without  inci 
dent  on  the  second  ballot ;    and  was  intended  in  some  degree  to  com-  j  \, 
fort  the  New  Yorkers  for  the  defeat  of  their  idol,  since  it  was  felt  that 
they  inclined  to  Hamlin  for  the  second  honors  in  preference  to  any 
other  candidate. 


I 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

^p 

at  the  defeat  of  their  beloved  leader,  accepted  the  result  with 
as  much  grace  as  could  be  expected,  and  Seward  himself, 
without  a  word  of  complaint,  pledged  his  loyalty  to  the 
ticket,  although  he  was  still  quietly  nursing  a  calm,  exas 
perating  superiority  to  Lincoln,  which  lasted  not  only 
throughout  the  campaign,  but  during  the  ensuing  adminis 
tration,  and  which  must  always  be  to  his  admirers  a  cause 
for  regret.1 

To  the  student  of  political  science  the  Republican  con 
vention  is  not  as  interesting  as  that  of  the  Democrats.  Re 
publicans  then,  as  now,  had  no  unit  rule  or  two-thirds  rule 
to  manipulate  and  quarrel  over,  and  no  occasion  arose  to 
attack  the  theory  of  convention  representation.  Equally 
in  the  two  conventions  the  influence  of  the  National  Chair 
man  and  of  the  National  Committee  was  insignificant.  But 
at  Charleston  and  at  Baltimore  the  crowd  of  spectators  was 
so  small  that  it  was  always  within  the  power  of  the  presiding 
officer  to  clear  the  galleries  to  maintain  order,  while  at  Chi 
cago  this  was  impossible.  With  less  than  five  hundred 
delegates  set  down  in  the  midst  of  a  vast  crowd  of  ten  thou 
sand  spectators,  there  was  one  continual  blast  of  shouting 
and  cheering  from  the  opening  to  the  close  of  the  convention. 
J|For  the  first  time  in  American  political  history  artificially 
manufactured  noise  from  thousands  of  throats  intimidated, 

1  The  Seward  party  in  New  York  was  very  bitter  against  Horace 
Greeley  for  the  latter's  opposition  at  Chicago.  It  had  been  known  that 
subordinate  editors  of  the  Tribune,  Dana  and  Pike,  were  opposed  to 
Seward,  but  Greeley's  opposition  had  not  been  common  knowledge.  The 
latter  was  accused  of  treachery  and  badgered  in  many  ways,  until  in  self- 
defense  he  published  in  his  paper,  a  letter  which  he  had  written  to  Seward 
in  1854,  in  which  he  showed  how  his  antagonism  to  Seward  had  been  of 
long  standing  and  for  sufficient  reasons.  Thus  was  Greeley's  attitude  at 
Chicago  explained.  It  was  current  report  that  at  Chicago,  after  the  nomi 
nation  of  Lincoln,  Greeley  had  been  heard  to  exclaim :  "Now  I  have  gotten 
even  with  Governor  Seward,"  but  this  was  denied.  Greeley  had  dis 
solved  the  political  partnership  with  Seward  because  the  latter  refused  to 
favor  the  nomination  of  Greeley  to  a  state  office  in  1854. 


THE  REPUBLICAN  CONVENTION  131 

and  to  some  extent  governed  the  deliberations  of  a  national/ 
political  convention^  In  the  dispute  over  the  Declaration 
of  Independence  the  crowd's  wild  support  of  Giddings,  Curtis, 
and  Blair,  who  spoke  in  favor  of  incorporating  that  document 
into  the  platform,  was  most  effective ;  against  the  thousands 
the  advocates  of  the  so-called  two-thirds  rule  could  make  no 
headway ;  their  influence  for  Lincoln  is  well  known.2 

1  The  New  York  Independent,  May,  31,  1860. 

2  The  convention  of  the  Constitutional  Union  party,  which  nominated 
John  Bell  of  Tennessee  for  President  and  Edward  Everett  of  Massachu 
setts  for  Vice  President,  was  held  at  Baltimore  a  few  days  before  the 
Republican  convention,  but  the  convention  itself  was  unimportant.     The 
principles  of  this  party  will  be  considered  later  in  connection  with  the 
general  political  campaign  of  all  J;he  parties. 


CHAPTER  VII 

CAMPAIGN   ARGUMENTS 

FTHHE  Democratic  conventions  and  the  adjournment  of 
-*-  Congress  late  in  June  had  scarcely  passed  when  the 
actual  campaign  set  in,  remarkable  for  its  length  and  the 
unusual  division  of  pnhlip.  spntimpnt.  There  were  radicals 
in  the  North  and  in  the  South,  the  Republicans  and  the 
Breckenridge  Democrats,  and  conservatives  in  both  sections, 
the  Douglas  Democrats  and  the  Bell-Everetts,  and  each  was 
bitterly  arrayed  against  the  others. 

Thft  p.ppnh1icfl,ns  made  capital  of  the  charge  of  corruption 
brought  against  the  Buchanan  administration.  Abundant 
evidence  was  at  hand,  although  extorted  by  means  that  were 
perhaps  unfair.  Early  in  March  the  Covode  Committee  was 
appointed  in  the  House  of  Representatives  by  a  partisan  vote 
and  with  no  debate  "for  the  purpose  of  investigating  whether 
the  President  of  the  United  States  or  any  other  officer  of  the 
government,  has  by  money,  patronage,  or  other  improper 
means  sought  to  influence  the  action  of  Congress  or  of  any 
committee  thereof,  for  or  against  the  passage  of  any  law 
appertaining  to  the  right  of  any  state  or  territory ;  and  also 
to  inquire  into  and  investigate  whether  any  officer  or  officers 
of  the  government  have  by  combination  or  otherwise  pre 
vented  and  defeated,  or  attempted  to  prevent  and  defeat, 
the  execution  of  any  law  or  laws  now  on  the  statute  book,  or 
whether  the  President  has  failed  to  compel  the  execution  of1 
any  law  thereof.  The  said  committee  shall  investigate  and 
inquire  into  the  abuses  at  the  Chicago  and  other  post  offices, 
and  at  the  Philadelphia  and  other  navy  yards,  and  as  to  any 
abuses  hi  connection  with  the  public  buildings  and  other 

132 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  133 

public  works  of  the  United  States.  Resolved,  further  that 
as  the  President  in  his  letter  to  the  Pittsburg  Centenary 
celebration  of  the  25th  of  November,  1858,  speaks  of  the 
'  employment  of  money  to  carry  elections/  said  committee 
shall  inquire  into  and  ascertain  the  amount  so  used  in  Penn 
sylvania  or  any  other  state  or  states ;  in  what  district  it  was 
expended  and  by  whose  authority  it  was  done,  and  from 
what  sources  the  money  was  derived,  and  report  the  names 
of  the  parties  implicated." 

These  sweeping  powers  included  in  their  scope  almost  every 
branch  of  the  internal  administration  of  the  country,  and 
together  with  the  work  of  other  committees  in  both  the  House 
and  the  Senate,  which  gave  themselves  to  similar  tasks,  they 
show  the  low  estate  to  which  the  power  and  dignity  of  the 
presidential  office  was  reduced. 

Before  the  committee  proceeded  to  its  task,  the  President, 
whose  personal  and  public  honor  seemed  to  be  impugned, 
sent  in  to  the  House  an  immediate  message  of  protest,  based 
on  the  constitutional  argument  that  the  President,  as  an 
independent  and  coordinate  branch  of  the  government,  was 
responsible  only  to  the  people,  and  that  over  him  the  House 
of  Representatives  had  no  power  except  that  of  impeach 
ment  ;  and  the  proposed  action  could  not  possibly  be  con 
strued  to  be  an  impeachment,  inasmuch  as  the  right  of  the 
accused,  as  a  public  official,  to  defend  himself,  always  granted 
in  impeachment  cases,  was  now  denied.  Moreover,  it  was 
unjust  that  Covode,  the  accuser,  should  be  constituted  the 
President's  judge,  as  a  member  of  the  committee.  "  Since 
the  days  of  the  Star  Chamber  and  general  warrants  there 
has  been  no  such  proceeding  in  England,"  declared  the 
Executive. 

Precedent  as  well  as  common  sense  were  on  the  side  of  the 
committee.  President  John  Quincy  Adams  and  President 
Andrew  Jackson  had  both  been  subjected  to  a  Senatorial 
investigation  as  to  their  use  of  the  patronage,  and  President 


134  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

James  K.  Polk  during  the  twenty-ninth  Congress  wrote: 
"If  the  House  of  Representatives,  as  the  grand  inquest  of 
the  nation  should  at  any  time  have  reason  to  believe  that 
there  had  been  malversation  in  office  by  an  improper  use  or 
application  of  the  public  money  by  a  public  official,  and 
should  think  proper  to  institute  an  inquiry  into  the  matter, 
all  the  archives  and  papers  of  the  Executive  department, 
public  and  private,  would  be  subject  to  an  inspection  and 
control  of  a  committee  of  their  body."  The  action  now 
proposed  in  1860  in  no  sense  constituted  the  accusation  in 
volved  in  impeachment  proceedings,  which  the  President 
gravely  assumed,  but  was  rather  a  preliminary  step  on  which 
later  impeachment  proceedings  might  be  based.1 

Damaging  facts  were  unearthed.  In  the  preceding  six 
years  Congress  had  ordered  three  and  one-half  million  dol 
lars'  worth  of  printing,  binding,  and  engraving,  all  of  which, 
in  the  opinion  of  Cornelius  Wendell,  who  had  done  the  work, 
could  have  been  done  for  fifty  per  cent  less  than  the  actual 
cost;  well  over  a  million  dollars  had  been  wasted.  Profits 
had  gone  for  campaign  purposes  and  for  the  support  of 
administration  papers,  namely  the  Constitution  in  Washing 
ton,  and  the  Argus  and  the  Pennsylvanian  in  Philadelphia. 
Quarrels  between  the  editors  of  these  papers  and  Wendell 
over  the  booty  led  up  to  the  disclosures.  It  was  brought  to 
light  that  eleven  thousand  dollars  of  this  money  had  been 
paid  to  the  editor  of  the  Pennsyhanian  and  five  thousand 
dollars  to  the  editor  of  the  Argus.  A  part  of  Wendell's 
examination  follows  :  "Do  you  say,  sir,  to  the  Argus,  by  the 
direction  of  the  Executive?  Answer.  Yes,  sir.  Question. 
I  thought  I  understood  you  to  say  the  other  day  that  there 
was  no  compulsion  exercised  upon  you  to  pay ;  but  that  you 
considered  you  were,  to  a  certain  extent,  bound  to  give  to 

the  Argus.     Answer.     Under  the  arrangement   with- . 

Allow  me  to  say  that obtained  the  contract  and  then— 

1  U.  S.  House  Reports,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Nos.  394  and  648. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  135 

and  his  friend  claimed  a  part,  and  I  was  directed  to  reduce 
the  amount  to and  to  pay  an  amount  to .  Ques 
tion.  Who  directed  you  ?  Answer.  The  Executive.  Ques 
tion.  Whom  do  you  mean  by  the  Executive?  Answer. 
James  Buchanan." 

The  editor  of  the  Pennsylvanian,  asked  by  what  authority 
the  Postmaster  General  distributed  certain  money,  to  which 
his  paper  laid  claim,  testified  as  follows:  "I  do  not  know, 
only  from  hearsay.  Question.  Had  you  any  conversation 
with  him  on  the  subject?  Answer.  Yes,  sir.  Question. 
Were  you  willing  to  abide  by  it  ?  Answer.  Yes,  I  had  to  do 
it.  The  President  told  me  it  was  divided  and  I  had  to  sub 
mit.  Question.  Did  the  President  say  so  ?  Answer.  Yes." 

In  the  Congressional  elections  of  1858  Wendell  distributed 
from  two  hundred  and  fifty  to  two  thousand  two  hundred 
and  fifty  dollars  in  each  of  ten  Congressional  districts. 
"Question.  If  you  had  not  been  in  receipt  of  the  proceeds 
of  the  public  printing,  would  you  have  contributed  money, 
as  you  say  you  have  done,  in  the  various  Congressional  dis 
tricts  ?  Answer.  I  would  not  have  been  able  to  contribute 
so  much.  It  was  the  profit  I  made  out  of  the  public  printing 
that  enabled  me  to  contribute  these  amounts  of  money.  The 
fact  that  I  was  in  a  public  position  known  to  be  remunerative, 
induced  frequent  calls  upon  me,  to  which  I  responded. 
Question.  I  wish  to  know  whether  or  not  there  was  an  im 
plied  or  expressed  understanding  between  you  and  any 
Executive  officer  of  the  government  that  you  should  make 
these  contributions  out  of  the  proceeds  of  the  printing,  for 
political  purposes?  Answer.  No,  sir;  none,  except  as  to 
contributions  I  made  toward  the  support  of  certain  news 
papers  which  the  President  saw  fit  to  assign  to  me  to  support. 
Question.  Did  any  of  these  Congressional  candidates  make 
demands  upon  you?  Answer.  Not  demands.  They  were 
simple  requests."  Asked  his  motives  in  dispensing  so  much 
money,  Wendell  replied:  "I  looked  upon  it  as  a  means  of 


136  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

procuring  from  the  Executive  such  work  as  was  at  his  dis 
posal."  He  spent  thirty-eight  thousand  dollars  to  help  elect 
Buchanan  in  1856  and  from  thirty  to  forty  thousand  dollars 
in  the  spring  of  1858  to  put  the  English  bill  through  Congress 
and  thus  end  the  Kansas  question.  This  last  was  in  the  ex 
pectation  that  "in  going  in  for  it  I  would  be  entitled  to  the 
favorable  consideration  of  the  government  in  matters  per 
taining  to  my  business."  1 

The  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  acting  "with  the  sanction  of 
the  President,"  was  censured  by  a  special  resolution  of  the 
House  of  Representatives  for  corruption  in  his  department. 
Coal,  timber,  and  stores  were  purchased  for  the  navy  at 
outrageously  high  prices,  and  in  both  the  Philadelphia  and 
Brooklyn  navy  yards  most  disgraceful  conditions  existed. 
At  the  former  yard  it  was  a  notorious  fact  that  contracts 
were  not  let  to  the  lowest  bidder.  In  the  following  typical 
letter,  imitated  by  all  his  rivals,  a  certain  contractor  pre 
sented  his  claims:  "On  the  score  of  politics,  which  I  have 
never  before  mentioned,  I  have  greater  claims  upon  the  gov 
ernment  than  my  competitors.  Our  shop  at  Bush  Hill,  Phil 
adelphia,  was  the  first  institution  in  this  country  that  raised 
the  banner  of  Buchanan  and  Breckenridge.  The  day  after 
the  nomination  we  raised  the  standard,  with  two  full  length 
portraits  of  the  President  and  of  the  Vice  President,  and  at 
the  election  our  shop  furnished  seven  hundred  and  sixty- 
four  votes  for  them.  Notwithstanding  the  present  mone 
tary  depression,  we  gave  three  hundred  and  twelve  votes  for 
the  administration  at  the  last  election.  We  have  supported 
the  party  with  material  aid  by  thousands  of  dollars,  and 
worked  hard,  as  any  of  the  party  in  Philadelphia  will 
testify." 

In  the  Brooklyn  yard  patronage  was  divided  between  a 
few  Democratic  Congressmen  of  New  York,  and  each  laborer, 

!For  the  Covode  report,  see  U.  S.  House  Reports,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess., 
No.  648. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  137 

who  well  knew  to  whom  he  owed  his  position,  was  sure  of  his 
place  so  long  as  his  patron  remained  on  intimate  terms  with 
the  President.  The  constructive  engineer,  master  plumber, 
and  master  block-maker  represented  one  Congressman,  the 
master  painter  another,  the  master  spar  maker,  master  black 
smith  and  the  timber  inspector  another;  each  master  se 
lected  the  men  under  him  and  increased  or  decreased  the 
force  at  will,  subject  only  to  the  orders  of  his  own  master,  the 
Congressman.  The  yard  was  a  mere  political  machine. 
One  representative  testified  :  "The  distribution  of  patronage 
by  members  of  Congress  was  very  deleterious  on  the  purity 
of  the  elections ;  injurious  to  the  workmen,  in  that  it  teaches 
laborers  and  mechanics  to  look  to  political  influence  for 
sustenance  and  support ;  that  he  himself  had  been  besieged 
and  beset  by  hundreds  of  claimants  at  his  house  and  in  his 
office."  Occasionally  the  politicians  fell  into  controversy 
with  the  masters,  whom  they  had  themselves  placed  in  office. 

One  wrote :  "  Mr. tells  me  that  you  are  to  take  men  on 

on  Tuesday.  May  I  ask  you  to  take  him  on  and  others 
whom  I  have  asked  you  ?  I  will  have  my  proportion  of  men 
under  you ;  if  you  do  not  give  them,  I  will  lodge  claims 
against  you.  You  have  turned  away  all  the  men  from  my 
district  but  one  already."  Upon  the  removal  of  another, 
his  sponsor  wrote:  "You  may  set  it  down  as  a  fact  that  I 
will  have  you  removed  if  you  don't  put  that  man  on  again." 

An  aggrieved  Congressman  wrote  to  the  Secretary  of  the 
Navy  that  he  could  not  get  justice,  that  is,  could  not  get  jobs 
for  the  men  in  his  district.  "I  appeal  to  you  to  vindicate 
my  district  from  this  unjust  and  partial  discrimination. 
Mr.  -  -  admits  that  he  has  not  one  man  in  his  shop  from 
my  district"  ;  in  answer  to  which  the  secretary  wrote  to  the 
yard  in  part  as  follows:  "The  department  desires  that  a 
fair  and  liberal  course  be  pursued  toward  Mr.  -  —  's  district, 
and  wishes  you  to  inquire  into  and  report  on  this  matter." 
Thereupon  "substantial  justice"  was  done. 


138  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Those  most  strenuously  recommended  for  places  were 
generally  very  indifferent  hands,  who  could  find  no  employ 
ment  elsewhere.  The  history  of  the  yard  was  little  else 
than  a  record  of  idleness,  theft,  insubordination,  fraud,  and 
gross  neglect  of  duty,  of  testimonials  and  gifts  of  gold  watches 
and  diamond  pins  to  the  masters  by  forced  contributions 
from  the  men,  and  the  ever  present  dominance  of  politics. 
Not  without  significance  was  the  employment  in  all  the  navy 
yards  of  the  country  on  the  eve  of  the  Congressional  elections 
of  1858  of  four  thousand  more  men  than  had  been  employed 
six  months  earlier.1 

With  the  knowledge  and  tacit  consent  of  the  President, 
who  frequently  talked  over  the  matter  with  him,  according 
to  one  witness,  political  assessments  were  made  on  the  men 
in  the  post  office,  custom  house  and  navy  yard  in  Philadel 
phia,  and  in  1856  seventy  thousand  dollars  had  been  raised 
in  this  way.  Naturalization  frauds  were  also  unearthed. 

In  the  same  net  of  calumnious  charges  the  post-office 
department  was  involved  by  statements  that  tended  to 
show  that  the  appropriation  of  forty  thousand  dollars  to 
print  the  post-office  blanks  was  distributed  to  political  friends, 
who  reaped  thirty  thousand  dollars  in  profits.  This  was 
the  patronage  that  had  without  avail  been  offered  to  John 
W.  Forney,  anti-Lecompton  Democratic  member  in  the 
House  of  Representatives  from  Pennsylvania,  for  his  vote 
on  the  Lecompton  constitution,  and  the  same  was  now  keep 
ing  alive  two  Democratic  papers. 

The  war  department  was  attacked.  A  committee  of 
investigation  revealed  the  sale  at  Fort  Snelling  in  Minnesota 
by  the  government,  of  a  military  reservation  of  eight  thou 
sand  acres  for  ninety  thousand  dollars,  or  eleven  dollars  an 
acre.  Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  land,  situated  at 

1  For  this  report  on  the  navy  department,  see  U.  S.  House  Reports, 
36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  No.  621.  December  1,  1857,  7113  men  were  employed 
in  the  navy  yards,  May  15, 1858,  6697,  November  1, 1858, 10,038. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  139 

the  junction  of  the  Mississippi  river  with  its  most  important 
tributary  north  of  the  Illinois,  and  almost  certain  to  be  the 
site  of  a  large  city,  was  worth  far  more  than  this,  the 
partisan  committee  only  dared  to  declare  that  the  sale  was 
"  in  judicious  and  improper"  and  had  been  conducted  "  with 
out  proper  competition/7  The  same  department,  seeking  a 
site  for  a  fort  near  New  York  City,  bought  for  considerably 
over  one  hundred  thousand  dollars  some  marsh  land  on 
Long  Island,  abounding  in  fever  and  ague,  which  had  been 
offered  for  sale  for  commercial  purposes  for  less  than  fifty 
thousand  dollars.1 

Almost  every  branch  of  the  national  administration, 
including  the  President  and  a  majority  of  his  secretaries, 
were  thus  besmirched  by  the  mud  of  partisan  politics,  par 
ticularly  the  President,  to  whom,  directly  or  indirectly, 
most  of  the  charges  led.  Seldom  has  a  national  Executive 
in  a  time  of  peace  been  so  vehemently  attacked.  Cornelius 
Wendell  would  not  be  moved  from  his  testimony  that  the 
President,  whom  he  visited  frequently,  sometimes  daily, 
personally  knew  of  his  operations.  Republicans  rejoiced 
openly  at  the  success  of  their  investigations.  Their  leading 
agency,  the  Covode  Committee,  reported  no  resolutions  and 
framed  no  impeachment  charges;  such  charges  indeed  had 
probably  not  been  planned.  But  one  hundred  thousand 
copies  of  the  report  of  the  committee  and  thousands  of  copies 
of  the  reports  of  the  other  committees  were  circulated  among 
the  voters,  till  the  newspapers  were  filled  with  material  on 
"Old  Buck's "  corruption  and  the  campaign  orators  furnished 
with  abundant  ammunition.  The  latter  by  no  means 
neglected  the  opportunity.  " Scoundrels/'  "rascals,"  "cor- 
ruptionists,"  "bands  of  thieves  and  robbers"  and  similar 
epithets  were  hurled  in  scorn  and  derision  at  the  discredited 
administration  in  endless  repetition.2  A  fit  candidate  in 

1  The  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  IV,  App.  p.  433. 

2  For  a  Bell-Everett  treatment  of  Buchanan's  corruption,  see  pp.  331-332. 


140  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

every  way  to  pit  against  this  shocking  corruption  was 
" Honest  Old  Abe/'  against  whom  never  a  suspicion  of 
dishonesty  had  been  cast.1 

The  standards  of  the  age  in  regard  to  the  public  service 
were  beginning  to  crumble  before  the  very  machinations  of 
party  politics  itself.  The  Democrats  represented  the  spoils 
system  then  at  the  height  of  power  and  prestige,  and  were 
no  worse  than  all  about  them.  But  the  system  inevitably 
led  to  evil  conditions  and  had  now  caught  in  its  clutches 
the  chief  magistrate  of  the  nation  as  the  leading  victim. 
Certainly  the  charges  against  the  administration  were  sub 
stantially  true.  The  Republicans,  on  the  other  hand,  for 
the  purposes  of  partisan  advantage  unconsciously  took  a 
stand  that  looked  to  the  coming  reform  of  the  civil  service. 

The  writhings  of  Buchanan,  like  those  of  any  victim  of 
circumstances,  were  pitiable  to  behold.  Followin-g  the 
Covode  report  he  sent  to  the  House  another  message  of 
protest,  which  repeated  the  arguments  of  the  former  message 
on  the  same  subject,  and  in  a  secret  letter,  since  published, 
he  wrote  to  the  editor  of  the  New  York  Herald  to  secure 
support  for  himself  from  that  great  paper.  The  whole  ef 
fort  of  the  committee  was  directed  against  himself  alone, 
complained  the  President;  they  had  examined  every  man, 
ex  parte,  who  from  disappointment  or  personal  malignity 
could  cast  a  shade  upon  the  character  of  the  Executive. 
"If  this  dragooning  can  exist,  the  presidential  office  would 
be  unworthy  of  the  acceptance  of  a  gentleman.  ...  In  per 
forming  my  duties  I  have  endeavored  to  be  not  only  pure 
but  unsuspected.  I  never  have  had  any  concern  in  award 
ing  contracts,  but  have  left  them  to  be  given  by  the  heads 
of  the  appropriate  departments.  I  have  ever  detested  all 
jobs,  and  no  man  at  any  period  of  my  life  has  ever  approached 
me  on  such  a  subject.  The  testimony  of  Wendell  contains 

1  Undoubtedly  the  Weed-bossed  Seward  of  Albany  standards  would 
not  have  made  so  strong  an  appeal  in  this  respect  to  people  as  did  Lincoln. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  141 

nothing  but  falsehoods,  whether  for  or  against  me,  for  he 
has  sworn  all  round.  .  .  .  Do  me  what  you  may  deem 
substantial  justice. "  1 

Vastly  more  important  than  these  charges  of  corruption 
in  the  existing  administration,  were  the  fihargga j>£_pn1  i t i cal 
aggression,  made  against  leading  parties ;  that  they  had  em 
braced  entirely  new  principles  unsanctioned  by  precedent  in 
the  history  of  their  respective  parties,  was  mutually  charged. 

The  Democratic  party,  in  control  of  the  government,  was~"' 
rapidly  committing  the  country  to  a  policy  of  national  ex 
pansion,  which  involved  the  acquisition  as  slave  territory 
of  Cuba,  Mexico,  and  possibly  parts  of  Central  and  South 
America,  the  extension  of  slavery  to  the  territories  of  the 
United  States  and  to  the  free  Northern  states,  and  the  re 
opening  of  the  foreign  slave  trade.  The  words  of  Douglas 
placed  at  the  head  of  a  prominent  Southern  paper,  well 
represented  the  dominant  party:  "We  are  bound  to  extend 
and  spread  until  we  absorb  the  entire  continent  of  America,  •— 
including  the  adjacent  islands,  and  become  one  grand  ocean- 
bound  Republic.  I  do  not  care  whether  you  like  it  or  not ; 
you  cannot  help  it;  it  is  the  decree  of  Providence.  This 
country  was  set  apart  as  an  asylum  for  the  oppressed  of  the 
whole  world."  2 

The  attempt  to  acquire  Cuba  was  a  policy  of  long  stand 
ing,  more  or  less  prominent  in  the  annals  of  the  country 
from  the  first  administration  of  George  Washington.  A 
recent  Buchanan  presidential  message  in  favor  of  the  pro 
ject  repeated  the  old  arguments  of  trade,  commerce,  and 
geographical  advantage^-and  a  bill  to  place  thirty  million 
dollars  in  the  hands  of  the  President  to  acquire  the  island, 
though  never  passed,  was  urgently  advocated  by  adminis 
tration  journals  and  followers  in  general.  So  acceptable 

1  The   Works  of  James  Buchanan,  collected  and  ed.  by  John  Basset 
Moore,  Philadelphia  and  London,  1908-1910,  X,  434. 

2  The  Memphis  Daily  Appeal,  August  14,  1860. 


142  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

was  the  policy  that  statesmen  of  all  parties  agreed  that  only 
one  more  Democratic  administration  was  needed  to  add  the 
island  to  the  domains  of  the  country,  by  fair  means  or  foul. 
By  "  manifest  destiny  the  Queen  of  the  Antilles  was  gravi 
tating  towards  the  American  shores." 

To  Mexico,  however,  more  immediate  attention  was 
given  in  this  presidential  year,  just  as  Cuba  had  held  the 
more  prominent  place  in  the  public  mind  during  Buchanan's 
first  years.  The  President's  annual  message,  December, 
1859,  set  forth  the  "  unhappy  condition  of  the  disturbed 
Republic."  After  almost  constant  revolution  since  the 
late  war  with  the  United  States,  a  new  Mexican  constitution 
had  been  formed  in  1857,  with  General  Comonfort  as  Presi 
dent.  By  a  military  revolution,  which  within  a  month's 
time  overthrew  the  new  government,  the  supreme  power  fell 
to  General  Zuloaga,  who  was  in  turn  opposed  by  General 
Juarez ;  the  former  was  a  military  adventurer,  while  the 
latter  had  legal  claims  to  the  presidency,  based  on  the  grounds 
that  as  Chief  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  he  should  accede 
to  the  chief  magistracy  during  the  absence  of  the  regularly 
elected  President.  In  spite  of  the  recognition  of  Juarez 
by  all  civilized  powers,  including  the  United  States,  the 
rebel  Zuloaga  held  out  for  some  time,  but  finally  transmitted 
his  place  to  General  Miramon,  who  was  now  in  possession 
of  the  capitol  at  the  City  of  Mexico,  supported  by  the  land- 
holding,  imperial  church  party,  against  the  constitutional 
liberal  forces  of  the  people  behind  Juarez,  entrenched  at 
Vera  Cruz.  Hopeless  anarchy  and  civil  war  prevailed. 

Outrages  of  the  worst  description  were  committed. 
Though  the  two  powers  were  nominally  at  peace  with 
one  another,  the  United  States  might  as  well  have  been  at 
war  with  her  neighbor.  Important  contracts  with  the  citi 
zens  of  the  richer  Republic,  involving  large  expenditures, 
were  defiantly  voided  by  the  Miramon  government,  the 
course  of  justice  was  interfered  with,  peaceful  American  citi- 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  143 

zens  were  expelled,  and  upon  some  forced  contributions  were 
levied.  Many  Americans  Miramon  arrested,  some  he  exe 
cuted.  In  April,  1859,  three  American  physicians,  who  had 
been  seized  in  the  hospital  at  Tacubaya,  while  hi  attendance 
upon  the  sick  and  the  dying  of  both  sides,  were  speedily  put 
to  death  without  trial  as  well  as  without  crime.  Ormond 
Chase,  a  young  American  of  courage  and  humanity,  was  ar 
bitrarily  executed  at  Tepic  without  even  a  conjecture  on 
the  part  of  his  friends  as  to  the  cause  of  the  arrest.  "  Other 
outrages/7  said  the  President  to  Congress,  " might  be  enu 
merated,  but  these  are  sufficient  to  illustrate  the  wretched 
state  of  the  country  and  the  unprotected  condition  of  the 
persons  and  the  property  of  our  citizens  in  Mexico."  Claims 
were  filed  at  Washington  against  the  Southern  Republic 
totalling  ten  million  dollars. 

The  President  recommended  that  a  law  be  passed  author 
izing  him,  under  such  conditions  as  might  seem  expedient 
to  Congress,  "to  employ  a  sufficient  military  force  to  enter 
Mexico  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  indemnity  for  the  past 
and  security  for  the  future."  The  present  case,  in  the  Presi 
dent's  judgment,  constituted  an  exception  to  the  wise  and 
settled  policy  of  the  United^  States  not  to  interfere  in  the 
domestic  concerns  of  foreign  nations.  Mexico  was  in  a 
state  of  anarchy  an£  confusion  from  which  she  could  not 
extricate  herself,  nor  could  she  prevent  incursions  of  banditti 
into  American  territory;  socially,  commercially,  and  politi 
cally  the  United  States  had  a  far  deeper  interest  in  her  fate 
than  had  any  other  nation.  If  we  did  not  extend  the  helping 
hand,  some  other  nation  would,  and  thus  at  last,  under  cir 
cumstances  of  increased  difficulty,  we  would  be  forced  to 
interfere  for  the  maintenance  of  the  established  American 
policy  of  the  Monroe  Doctrine.  This  earnest  counsel  Con 
gress  disregarded. 

Thus  foiled,  the  President  took  up  the  policy  of  a  treaty 
with  the  Juarez  faction,  and  early  in  January,  1860,  he  sent 


144  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

to  the  Senate  for  ratification  a  "  treaty  of  transits  and  com 
merce"  and  a  "  convention  to  enforce  treaty  stipulations, 
and  to  maintain  order  and  security  in  the  territory  of  the 
Republics  of  Mexico  and  the  United  States."  Under  the 
terms  of  these  documents  there  was  guaranteed  to  this  coun 
try  peculiar  trade  advantages,  the  secure  possession  and  en 
joyment,  free  of  duty  and  of  Mexican  control,  of  the  South 
ern  Tehuantepec  route  across  Mexican  territory  from  the 
Atlantic  to  the  Pacific  on  the  way  to  California  and  Asia, 
and  of  two  other  similar  routes  in  the  North.  In  order  to 
insure  the  execution  of  the  treaty,  the  United  States  was 
authorized  to  lend  to  the  Juarez  faction  both  land  and  naval 
forces,  and  in  return  she  herself  agreed  to  pay  four  million 
dollars,  one-half  of  which  was  to  go  to  Mexico  and  one-half 
to  American  citizens  with  claims  against  Mexico. 

Two  months  later,  while  these  treaties  were  pending  in  the 
Senate,  and  while  the  popular  discussion  of  the  various 
phases  of  slavery  was  already  seething  at  white  heat,  the 
country  was  electrified  by  the  news  that  the  American 
squadron  in  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  had  fired  upon  two  Mexican 
vessels  at  Vera  Cruz,  that  the  fire  had  been  returned,  that 
blood  had  been  shed  and  lives  sacrificed.  Were  actual 
hostilities  at  hand?  At  last  had  the  administration  gained 
what  many  feared  it  was  all  along  aiming  at, — armed  conflict 
for  the  coveted  prize  of  more  Mexican  territory  ?  It  trans 
pired  that  two  steamers  of  the  Miramon  faction,  besieging 
the  Juarez  forces  at  Vera  Cruz,  had  been  intercepted  by  the 
United  States  vessels  and  on  being  ordered  in  the  middle  of 
the  night  to  display  their  colors  had  answered  by  a  volley : 
the  firing  becoming  general,  three  Americans  were  wounded, 
one  mortally,  while  fifteen  Mexicans  were  killed  and  ten 
wounded.1 

1  The  two  Mexican  vessels  were  soon  overpowered  and  towed  to  New 
Orleans,  and  there  libeled  as  prizes  in  the  courts  of  the  United  States,  but 
the  judge  ruled  that  there  was  no  actual  conflict  between  the  two  coun 
tries  and  released  the  ships. 


'  -7 
CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  145 

The  incident  itself  was  small,  but  the  warm  approval 
which  it  elicited  from  the  Democratic  press  of  the  country 
was  truly  alarming.  In  a  prominent  editorial,  headed 
"Manifest  Destiny"  the  Chicago  Herald  declared:  "It  is 
becoming  quite  clear  to  men  of  sense  that  the  United  States 
can  no  longer  refrain  from  taking  a  prominent  and  active 
part  in  the  supervision  and  management  of  the  affairs  of 
our  neighbors,  the  Mexicans.  The  utter  incapacity  of  the 
Mexican  people  to  govern  themselves  is  no  longer  question 
able.  The  interest  of  the  civilized  world  would  be  subserved 
and  the  interests  of  Mexico  and  the  United  States  would  be 
infinitely  benefited  by  a  determined  and  bold  protectorate  on 
the  part  of  the  United  States.  Our  relations  with  Mexico 
are  necessarily  of  a  character  that  renders  her  continued 
anarchy,  confusion,  and  lawless  violence  no  longer  suffer- 
able.  However  we  might  desire  that  our  neighbors  would 
save  us  this  trouble,  it  is  clear  that  our  destiny  draws  us  for 
ward  to  the  control  and  final  absorption  of  Mexico."  l 
"The  sick  man  is  at  the  last  gasp,  and  to  his  funeral  we  must 
go,  no  matter  whether  we  relish  it  or  not,"  said  the  New 
York  Express.11  (  There  can  be  no  more  backing  down,"  said 
Frank  Leslie's  Weekly;  "our  government  has  at  last  acted 
with  the  vigor  becoming  a  great  nation."  3 

Here  was  Democratic  policy  written  spontaneously  and 
indelibly  in  the  administration  press  of  the  country,  beyond 
the  power  of  any  quibbling  party  platform  to  add  or  to 
detract.  \Democrats  of  all  factions  were  ready  for  the  occuv 
pation  and  absorption  of  the  sister  Republic  and  believed 
that  this  would  be  speedily  accomplished;  Republicans, 
withholding  approval,  expected  the  same  outcome. 

Meantime  the  Mexican  treaties  of  the  President  were 
hanging  fire  in  the  Senate,  where  finally  they  were  defeated 

1  The  Chicago  Herald,  March  10,  1860. 

2  The  New  York  Express,  March  20,  1860. 

3  Frank  Leslie's  Illustrated  Weekly,  March  31,  188f\ 
L 


146  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

despite  the  support  of  the  administration  party  and  of  such 
conservative  papers  as  the  New  York  Times.  The  Charles 
ton  convention,  convening  within  six  weeks  of  the  Vera  Cruz 
incident,  never  mentioned  the  subject,  and  was  apparently 
as  dead  toward  Mexico  as  toward  the  President  himself. 
Territories  already  acquired  were,  in  the  judgment  of  the 
ruling  statesmen  of  the  party,  a  better  immediate  issue  on 
which  to  fight  the  Republicans  for  the  presidency  than  was 
the  forcible  acquisition  of  new  regions.  If,  as  was  charged, 
Buchanan  had  procured  the  Vera  Cruz  incident  and  had 
brought  the  country  to  the  verge  of  a  foreign  war,  for  the 
sake  of  throwing  a  new  issue  before  the  country  and  thus 
preventing  the  threatened  split  of  his  party  on  the  domestic 
question,  he  signally  failed.  But  as  has  already  been  ob 
served,  the  burst  of  approval  by  Democratic  papers  of  what 
was  supposed  to  be  impending  annexation  of  Mexico,  se 
curely  fixed  the  step  as  good  Democratic  policy. 

A  bullying,  "big  stick"  attitude,  with  the  approval  of  the 
party,  had  been  displayed  by  the  administration  toward  the 
South  American  Republics  two  years  before  the  Mexican 
question  became  acute,  in  the  dispatch  to  Paraguay  of  the 
greatest  naval  expedition  in  the  country's  history  up  to 
that  time.  In  this  poor  and  backward  country  of  Paraguay 
in  1855  a  sailor  from  the  United  States  steamer  Water  Witch, 
while  on  a  surveying  expedition,  had  been  killed  by  an 
attacking  party  of  natives,  and  for  the  outrageous  affront 
only  a  fleet  of  nineteen  armed  vessels,  with  two  hundred 
guns  and  two  thousand  five  hundred  soldiers  and  marines, 
could  exact  adequate  recompense  and  "  achieve  a  happy 
effect  in  favor  of  our  country  throughout  all  that  remote 
portion  of  the  world." 

With  the  same  Democratic  approval,  William  Walker, 
filibuster,  "  gray-eyed  man  of  destiny,"  was  now  engaged  in 
planting  in  a  "  glorious  land  of  promise  the  institutions  of 
the  South."  This  policy,  aimed  at  the  independence  of 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  147 

Nicaragua  and  possibly  of  Honduras  in  Central  America, 
held  public  attention  throughout  the  fall  months  of  the  year, 
until  Walker's  capture  by  British  intervention  and  his  en 
suing  execution  by  the  forces  of  Honduras,  brought  it  to  an 
inglorious  end.  At  the  same  time  the  Italian  Garibaldi  was 
thrilling  the  world  by  his  exploits  in  Sicily  and  Naples,  and 
comparisons  of  the  careers  of  the  two  men  abounded.  On 
the  one  hand  was  the  Italian,  noble,  chivalrous,  disinter 
ested,  and  self-sacrificing,  conquering  kingdoms  and  despot 
isms  only  to  dedicate  them  to  liberty;  on  the  other,  the 
American  freebooter  and  pirate,  inferior,  mischievous,  large 
in  promise,  but  without  the  qualities  of  leadership,  attempt 
ing  to  fasten  his  clutches  on  a  weak  province  in  the  interests 
of  human  bondage. 

Yet  the  Mobile  Register,  a  leading  Southern  paper,  believed 
the  success  of  Walker  to  be  "of  far  more  vital  moment  to 
the  South  than  the  suicidal  policy  of  protection,1  which  sets 
the  brains  of  so  many  on  fire,  and  serves  so  many  others  as 
a  pretext  to  gratify  their  personal  ambitions.  No  territory 
that  we  can  acquire  through  the  Federal  government  can  be 
of  use  to  the  South,  and  every  friend  of  the  South  ought  to 
resist  such  acquisitions.  We  have  not  negroes  enough  for 
our  own  use,  much  less  to  people  new  countries,  and  the  slave 
trade  cannot  be  legally  opened  for  a  good  while  yet.  But 
the  establishing,  on  the  Southern  frontier,  of  slaveholding 
Republics,  encouraging  and  legalizing  the  importation  of 
Africans,  impairs  no  established  financial  interest  of  our  own, 
and  gives  us  natural  allies,  who  may  eventually,  if  deemed 
proper,  be  connected  to  us  by  close  ties.  This  is  the  true 
Southern  policy,  and  one  well  understood  by  those  who 
have  preserved  their  soberness  of  mind  amid  the  senseless 
clamor  which  has  caused  so  many  of  the  American  people  to 
go  mad."  2 

1  That  is,  protection  to  slavery  in  the  territories  of  the  United  States. 
8  Quoted  in  the  New  York  Times,  August  21,  1860. 


148  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

The  work  of  the  secret  order  of  the  Knights  of  the  Golden 
Circle,  organized  in  1854  and  now  actively  bent  on  pro- 
slavery  interference  for  Juarez  in  Mexico,  was  not  without 
significance.  Although  the  importance  of  the  movement  was 
assuredly  exaggerated,  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  it  existed 
in  some  form. 

United  States  Senator  Brown  of  Mississippi  summed  up 
to  his  constituents  the  Southern  attitude  as  follows:  "I 
want  Cuba;  I  want  Tamaulipas,  Potosi,  and  one  or  two 
other  Mexican  states;  and  I  want  them  all  for  the  same 
reason;  for  the  planting  and  the  spread  of  slavery.  And 
a  footing  in  Central  America  will  powerfully  aid  us  in  ac 
quiring  those  other  states.  Yes,  I  want  these  countries  for 
the  spread  of  slavery.  I  would  spread  the  blessings  of 
slavery,  like  the  blessings  of  the  Divine  Master,  to  the 
uttermost  ends  of  the  earth ;  and  rebellious  and  wicked  as 
the  Yankees  have  been,  I  would  even  extend  it  to  them."  1 

A  severe  criticism  of  this  bold  policy  was  voiced  by  Sena 
tor  Crittenden  of  Kentucky.  Once  the  government  had 
striven  to  maintain  amity  and  kindly  relations  with  the 
states  of  South  America  and  had  succeeded.  These  states 
had  come  into  the  world  as  free  nations  under  our  auspices, 
the  United  States  being  their  exemplar  and  protection ;  the 
good  will  of  a  whole  continent  was  freely  ours.  Now  this 
mighty  fund  of  national  strength,  so  nobly  achieved,  was 
giving  way  to  suspicion  and  fear.  Under  a  new  policy  the 
Washington  government  was  searching  the  whole  continent 
for  little  causes  of  offense  and  quarrel.  A  Yankee  could  no 
sooner  go  traveling  abroad  than  somebody  imposed  on  him, 
cheated  him,  or  struck  him  and  he  came  to  the  government 
with  a  claim.  The  Paraguayan  chief,  Topez,  who  was  in  no 
wise  as  formidable  as  a  Cherokee  Indian  chief  in  this  country, 
fired  a  gun  at  one  of  our  ships,  and  stole  some  property  of 
an  American  citizen,  and  lo  !  the  country's  largest  armada 

1  The  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  I,  p.  571. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  149 

must  be  dispatched  to  obtain  redress.     This  was  both  un 
dignified  and  ridiculous.1 

In  their  opposition,  the  Republicans  revived  the  spirit  of^ 
the  Wilmot  Proviso  of  Mexican  War  times,  and  laid  stress 
on  the  inevitable  spread  of  slavery  consequent  upon  the  pro 
posed  expansion.  In  the  name  of  freedom  only  they  were 
expansionists.  Senator  Seward  confidently  looked  to  the 
addition  of  British  America,  Russian  America,  and  Spanish 
America  to  the  United  States,  all  united  in  a  land  of  freedom ; 
the  men  were  then  living,  said  the  Senator,  who  would  see 
this  consummation.2 

Up  to  this  point  in  the  program  of  expansion,  Democrats 
of  every  stripe  were  in  accord;  they  all  coveted  Cuba, 
Mexico,  parts  of  Central  and  perhaps  of  South  America, 
little  questioning  the  desirability  of  such  acquisitions. 

Another  step  in  the  program  involved  the  precise  manner 
of  the  spread  of  slavery  into  the  Western  territories  already 
acquired.  The  contest  on  this  point  between  the  Demo 
cratic  factions,  almost  entirely  of  a  historical  character, 
has  already  been  described ; 3  between  the  Douglasites  and 
the  Republicans  the  fight  was  just  as  hot.4  Douglas  harked 
back  to  the  American  Revolution  for  the  beginning  of  his 
great  principle  of  self-government.  "The  dogma  that  a 

1  The  Life  of  John  J.  Crittenden,  by  Ann  Mary  Butler  Crittenden,  Phila 
delphia,  1871,  II,  176-177. 

2  The  New  York  Herald,  September  20,  1860 ;   this  is  an  extract  from  a 
speech  delivered  by  the  Senator  at  St.  Paul,  Minnesota. 

3  See  pp.  92-101. 

4  Against  the  Breckenridge  contention  that  Congress  should  pass  a 
slave  code  for  the  territories  it  was  pointed  out  more  than  once  that  such 
procedure  by  an  act  of  Congress  would  simply  be  an  exercise  of  the 
same  power  over  the  territories  that  the  Republicans  argued  for.     If 
Congressional  legislation  could  protect  slavery  in  the  territories,  would 
not  that  very  act  constitute  a  precedent  for  further  Congressional  action, 
this  time  forbidding  slavery?     There  was  no  difference  in  the  two  acts. 
This  argument  disregarded  the  stand  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  the  Dred 
Scott  case. 


150  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

citizen  of  the  territories  derives  his  power  from  Congress  is 
the  old  Tory  idea  that  the  citizens  of  the  colonies  derived 
their  power  from  the  Crown.  We  exploded  this  idea  in  the 
War  of  the  Revolution,  and  the  principle  of  popular  sov 
ereignty  was  born.  We  hold,  therefore,  that  the  citizen 
does  not  derive  power  from  Congress,  for  he  has  already 
derived  it  from  Almighty  God."  1  The  settler,  going  to  a 
territory,  was  entitled  to  as  much  self-government  as  the 
English  colonist.  "You  do  not  doubt  but  that  the  right  of 
self-government  is  an  inherent  right  in  North  Carolina.  If 
it  be  an  inherent  right  in  this  state,  let  me  ask  you,  when  you 
emigrate  to  Kansas,  at  what  point  of  time  do  you  forfeit 
that  right  ?  Do  you  lose  all  the  sense,  all  the  intelligence, 
all  the  virtue  you  had,  on  the  wayside,  while  emigrating  to 
a  territory  of  the  United  States?  .  .  .  Those  of  us  who 
penetrated  into  the  wilderness  think  that  we  know  what 
kind  of  laws  and  institutions  will  suit  our  interests  quite  as 
well  as  you  who  never  saw  the  country.  .  .  .  You  cannot 
convince  us  that  we  are  not  as  good  as  our  brothers,  who 
remain  in  the  old  states.'7 

The  attractive  power  of  these  simple  arguments  was  very 
strong.  Whether  constitutional  and  legal  or  not,  said  the 
New  York  Times,  popular  sovereignty  in  the  territories  as 
to  slavery  had  a  strong  hold  on  the  masses ;  it  satisfied  the 
instincts  of  nine-tenths  of  the  liberty-loving  people  of  the 
North  as  a  fair,  just,  and  safe  way  of  solving  a  hard  prob 
lem.3  The  New  York  Tribune  went  so  far  as  to  suggest  that 
Congress  allow  the  people  of  Dakota,  Idaho,  Arizona,  and 
Nevada  to  organize  themselves  as  territories,  elect  their 
own  officials,  and  govern  themselves  through  their  own  legis 
lature,  while  a  third  leading  Republican  paper,  the  Spring- 

1  The  Springfield  Tri-Weekly  Republican,  July  23,  1860. 

2  The  Newbern  Daily  Progress,  September  5,  1860 ;    this  is  from  the 
speech  delivered  by  Douglas  at  Raleigh,  North  Carolina. 

3  The  New  York  Times,  June  26,  1860. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  151 

field  Republican,  believed  that  Congressional  power  over 
the  territories,  proclaimed  as  Republican  doctrine  in  the 
party  platform  of  1856  but  evaded  in  that  of  1860,  had 
ceased  to  be  a  test  of  true  Republicanism.  Many  of  the 
party  deemed  the  principle  unnecessary  and  unwise,  and 
few  had  any  idea  that  it  would  ever  be  carried  out  in  actual 
practice.1 

In  their  formal  platform  utterances  on  the  subject  the 
Republicans,  far  from  openly  opposing  Douglas'  position, 
contented  themselves  with  a  vague  and  half-hearted  decla 
ration  that  under  the  constitution,  which  guaranteed  life, 
liberty,  and  happiness  to  all  persons  except  when  withheld 
by  the  due  process  of  law,  slavery  could  not  legally  and  con 
stitutionally  be  set  up  in  the  territories  by  any  power.  When 
over  the  veto  of  the  territorial  Governor  the  territory  of 
Kansas  at  last  excluded  slavery  from  its  midst,  the  whole 
Republican  press  applauded,  forgetful  for  the  moment  of 
Congressional  control ;  when  in  the  territory  of  Nebraska 
a  Governor's  veto  destroyed  the  territorial  act  to  forbi< 
slavery  there,  the  same  press  rose  up  in  indignation.  Practi 
cally  the  Republicans  wanted  slavery  to  be  forbidden  in  the 
territories  but  cared  little  by  what  power  this  was  accom 
plished,  whether  by  Congress  or  by  the  people  of  the  terri 
tories  themselves ;  the  end  and  not  the  means  was  the  , 
important  thing.  Congressional  control  was  a  makeshift, 
a  convenient  weapon  with  which  to  oppose  the  possibility 
of  the  establishment  of  territorial  slavery  by  the  territory 
itself,  which  was  always  the  lurking  danger  of  popular 
sovereignty.  This  very  opportunism  was  a  tribute  to  the 
power  of  the  Douglas  principle. 

A  few  Republican  orators,  but  only  a  few,  boldly  attacked 
Douglas'  position.  Only  by  giving  the  blacks  themselves 
a  vote  on  their  own  enslavement  could  true  popular  sover 
eignty  on  the  subject  be  secured ;  it  was  wrong  everywhere 

1  The  Springfield  Tri-Weekly  Republican,  September  28,  1860. 


152  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

to  allow  whites  deliberately  to  enslave  blacks.  Let  there 
be  white  and  black  sovereignty  on  the  question,  not  white 
alone.  It  wras  blasphemy  for  Douglas  to  declare:  "This 
government  was  made  by  white  men,  on  the  white  basis, 
for  the  benefit  of  white  men  and  then:  posterity  forever, 
and  should  be  administered  by  white  men,  and  by  none  other 
whatsoever;"  double  blasphemy  for  him  to  say:  "When 
the  struggle  is  between  the  white  man  and  the  negro,  I  am 
for  the  white  man;  when  it  is  between  the  negro  and  the 
crocodile,  I  am  for  the  negro."  To  suppose  that  even 
popular  sovereignty  meant  complete  territorial  control  was 
an  unmitigated  and  unadulterated  sham,  for  over  the  terri 
torial  legislature  stood  the  Governor's  veto,  over  him  his 
appointment  and  control  by  the  President  of  the  United 
States,  and  over  all  the  Supreme  Court;  little  was  in  the 
end  really  left  to  the  people.  Moreover,  territorial  slavery 
would  inevitably  lead  to  the  extension  of  the  conditions 
of  social  terrorism,  which  then  obtained  in  the  Southern 
states ;  freedom-loving  whites  would  be  hounded  out ;  then- 
free  discussion  throttled;  then-  newspapers,  their  Tribunes, 
Independents,  and  Posts,  debarred;  their  preachers'  lips 
sealed.  To  fasten  on  the  virgin  soil  of  the  West,  the 
South  as  it  existed  in  1860,  would  be  a  blow  to  civilization 
and  progress,  to  which  no  American  should  give  sanction.1 
i-'  Andrew  Johnson,  a  Dou^his  "Tniled  States  Senator  from 
I  Tennessee,  turned  the  tables  by  asking  what  the  Republi- 
(  cans  would  do  with  the  blacks  in  the  territories.  Would 
\  they  allow  them  to  hold  office,  sit  on  juries,  give  testimony 

1  Early  in  the  spring,  in  the  House  of  Representatives  at  Washington, 
the  Republicans  by  a  trick  forced  the  hand  of  the  Democrats  by  bringing 
up  for  vote  the  question  of  forbidding  by  Congressional  action  a  domestic 
institution  of  the  West,  namely  polygamy.  This  bill  passed  the  House 
by  a  vote  of  one  hundred  sixty  to  one  hundred  and  forty-nine.  If 
Congress  possessed  the  power  to  forbid  this  territorial  institution,  why 
could  it  not  also  forbid  slavery  in  the  territories,  another  domestic  insti 
tution  ? 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  153 

in  the  courts,  serve  in  the  militia,  and  send  their  children  to 
the  public  schools  on  an  equal  basis  with  white 
None  could  tell,  and  the  Republicans  would  not 

From  squatter  sovereignty  the  contest  extended  'to  thfe 
question  of  loyalty  to  the  Supreme  Court,  which  had  come" 
suddenly  to  be  the  chosen  agency  of  the  Breckenridgeites  to 
achieve  the  spread  of  slavery  to  the  territories.  Brecken- 
ridge  praised  and  supported  that  tribunal  for  the  Dred 
Scott  decision,  while  Douglas,  although  forswearing  this  par 
ticular  "decision,  still  promised  to  obey  when  another  was 
delivered.1  Why  thus  did  the  Democracy  turn  its  back  on 
an  unbroken  record  of  more  than  a  half  century  ?  A  single 
decision  in  favor  of  slavery  was  the  determining  factor. 
Thomas  Jefferson,  the  father  of  the  party,  who  opposed  the 
court  almost  from  the  time  of  his  entrance  into  the  cabinet  of 
President  Washington,  said  in  1810  :  "But  the  opinion  which 
gives  to  the  judges  the  right  to  decide  what  laws  are  consti 
tutional  and  what  not,  not  only  for  themselves  in  their  own 
sphere  of  action,  but  for  the  legislative  and  executive  also  in 
their  spheres,  would  make  the  judiciary  a  despotic  branch." 
To  the  end  of  his  life  in  1825  the  great  statesman  led  his 
party  in  violent  opposition  to  the  court.  In  1832,  President 
Andrew  Jackson,  the  next  great  name  in  the  history  of  the 
party,  said  in  a  presidential  message :  "If  the  opinion  of  the 
Supreme  Court  covered  the  whole  ground  in  this  case,  it 
ought  not  to  control  the  coordinate  authorities  of  this 
government.  The  Congress,  the  Executive,  and  the  Court 
must  each  for  itself  be  guided  by  its  own  opinion  of  the 
constitution.  Each  public  officer,  who  takes  an  oath  to 
support  the  constitution,  swears  that  he  will  support  it  as  he 
understands  it,  and  not  as  it  is  understood  by  others.  It  is 
as  much  the  duty  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  of  the 

1  This  step  was  in  advance  of  the  Freeport  doctrine,  and  was  taken  in 
the  spring  of  1860  in  the  Douglas  convention  platform.  It  was  another 
"twist"  of  candidate  Douglas,  adept  in  the  art  of  political  shifting. 


154  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Senate,  and  of  the  President,  to  decide  upon  the  constitu 
tionality  of  any  bill  or  resolution  which  may  be  presented 
to  them  for  passage  or  approval,  as  it  is  for  the  Supreme 
Judges,  when  it  may  be  brought  before  them  for  judicial 
decision.  The  opinion  of  the  judges  has  no  more  authority 
over  Congress  than  the  opinion  of  Congress  has  over  the 
judges;  and  in  that  point  the  President  is  independent  of 
both.  The  authority  of  the  Supreme  Court,  therefore, 
must  not  be  permitted  to  control  the  Congress  or  the  Execu 
tive  when  acting  in  their  legislative  capacities,  but  to  have 
only  such  influence  as  the  force  of  their  reasoning  may 
deserve." 

Buchanan  himself,  who  now  praised  the  tribunal,  while  a 
Senator  of  the  United  States  said  to  his  fellow-senators  in 
1841 :  "But  even  if  the  judges  had  settled  the  question,  I 
should  never  hold  myself  bound  by  their  decision,  whilst 
acting  in  a  legislative  capacity.  Unlike  the  Senator  from 
Massachusetts,  I  shall  never  consent  to  place  the  political 
rights  and  liberties  of  the  people  in  the  hands  of  any  judicial 
tribunal.  .  .  .  The  experience  of  all  ages  and  countries  has 
demonstrated  that  judges  instinctively  lean  toward  the 
prerogatives  of  government;  and  it  is  notorious  that  the 
Court,  during  the  whole  period  in  which  he  presided  over  it, 
embracing  so  many  years  of  its  existence,  has  inclined  toward 
the  highest  assertion  of  Federal  power. "  1 

Every  Democratic  national  convention  previous  to  1860 
breathed  the  same  spirit  of  hostility  to  the  august  tribunal. 
But  at  last,  in  a  trice,  because  an  important  decision  in 
their  favor,  the  party  turned  into  upholders  of  the  court. 

It  was  now  the  part  of  the  antislavery  party  to  revile  the 
tribunal,  which  had  turned  so  squarely  against  them.  One 

1  This  is  a  reference  to  Chief  Justice  Marshal.  Roscoe  Conkling, 
member  of  the  House  of  Representatives  from  New  York  state,  made  a 
great  speech  on  this  subject;  see  the  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1 
Sess.,  Vol.  IV,  App.,  p.  233. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  155 

of  the  Republican  leaders,  United  States  Senator  Henry 
Wilson  of  Massachusetts,  declared:  "We  shall  change  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  and  place  men  in  that 
court  who  believe  with  its  pure  and  immaculate  Chief  Jus 
tice,  John  Jay,  that  our  prayers  will  be  impious  to  Heaven, 
while  we  sustain  and  support  human  slavery.'7  Senator 
Seward  said  :  "Let  the  court  recede.  Whether  it  recedes  or 
not,  we  shall  reorganize  the  court  and  thus  reform  its  polit 
ical  sentiments  and  practices  and  bring  them  into  harmony 
with  the  constitution  and  the  laws  of  the  nation."  Lincoln 
said :  "If  I  were  in  Congress,  and  a  vote  should  come  up  on 
a  question  whether  slavery  should  be  prohibited  in  a  new 
territory,  in  spite  of  the  Dred  Scott  decision,  I  would  vote 
that  it  should."  Senator  Sumner  said:  "I  am  abound  to 
disobey  this  act."  1 

Support  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  was 
plainly  a  matter  of  political  expediency. 

Further  still,  in  the  development  of  their  expansionist 
ideas,  the  slaveholders  cast  longing  glances  in  the  direction  of 
the  free  states  of  the  North  and  hoped  sometime  to  be  able 
to  take  their  slaves  there  with  impunity.  Why  not  ?  It 
was  recognized  that  a  logical  conclusion  from  the  Dred  Scott 
decision  looked  in  that  direction,  for  if  the  constitution  with 
its  guarantees  of  property  rights  fastened  slavery  on  the 
territories,  so  also  did  it  on  the  free  states,  where  the  same 
constitution  was  operative.  Lincoln  recognized  this  in  the 
debates  with  Douglas.  Only  a  definite  judicial  decision  on 
the  special  point  was  needed  to  complete  the  revolution,  and 
this  was  expected  in  the  coming  settlement  of  the  Lemmon 
case  in  the  national  tribunal.  Yet,  with  all  this  impending, 
it  cannot  be  said  that  this  matter  was  a  clear  cut  issue  in  the 
campaign.  Few  Republicans  in  their  public  utterances 

1  For  these  references,  see  the  New  York  Herald,  October  9,  1860 ;  for 
more  material  on  Lincoln's  position,  see  Abraham  Lincoln;  Complete 
Works,  ed.  by  John  G.  Nicolay  and  John  Hay,  New  York,  1894,  I,  255. 


156  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

referred  to  it,  and  Democrats  never.  Doubtless  the  former 
felt  that  they  could  win  without  the  revolutionary  slogan 
that  the  very  liberty  of  their  own  states  was  at  stake,  and 
that  the  South,  which  was  already  committing  itself  to  the 
extreme  of  secession,  ought  not  to  be  further  exasperated. 

A  reason  for  the  desire  for  the  repeal  of  the  laws  forbidding 
the  foreign  slave  trade  is  now  apparent.  To  reopen  the 
trade  would  be  to  bring  in  thousands  of  fresh  Africans  and 
thus  cap  the  climax  of  the  whole  imperialistic  program. 
With  Cuba,  Mexico,  and  parts  of  Central  and  South  America 
added  to  the  domains  of  the  United  States  as  a  great  slave- 
holding  Republic,  with  the  Western  territories  and  the 
Northern  free  states  open  to  the  institutions  of  slavery,  there 
would  be  need  of  more  blkcks  to  fill  the  new  places,  to  cul 
tivate  the  new  areas,  and  reduce  them  to  a  slavery  status. 
There  would  be  ample  room  for  all  the  Africans  who  could 
be  secured. 

This  vast  scheme  of  slavery  extension,  now  well  developed 
and  openly  adopted  by  the  Democratic  party,  was  beheld  by 
many  with  amazement,  for  its  successful  execution  involved 
certain  radical  changes,  that  fairly  laid  the  party  open  to  the 
charge  of  aggression  in  having  entirely  altered  its  funda 
mental  principles. 

Only  twelve  years  back,  in  1847  and  in  1848,  the  Democ 
racy,  in  every  free  state  but  one,  was  in  strong  opposition  to 
slavery  in  the  territories  to  be  acquired  from  Mexico.  The 
Democratic  legislature  of  Michigan  resolved  in  1847 :  "That 
in  the  acquisition  of  any  new  territory,  whether  by  purchase, 
conquest,  or  otherwise,  we  deem  it  the  duty  of  the  general 
government  to  extend  over  the  same  the  Ordinance  of  1787, 
with  all  its  rights  and  privileges,  conditions  and  immunities." 
The  Democratic  legislature  of  New  Hampshire  declared  in 
the  same  year :  "  We  are  opposed  to  the  extension  of  slavery 
over  any  such  territory ;  and  we  also  approve  the  vote  of  our 
senators  and  representatives  in  Congress  in  favor  of  the 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  157 

Wilmot  Proviso;"  the  same  was  passed  in  1848,  while  in 
1849  this  legislature  declared :  "We  are  firmly  and  unalter 
ably  opposed  to  the  extension  of  slavery  over  any  portion  of 
American  soil  now  free."  The  Democratic  legislature  of 
Rhode  Island,  1847,  placed  itself  on  record  "  against  the  ac 
quisition  of  territory  by  conquest  or  otherwise,  beyond  the 
present  limits  of  the  United  States,  for  the  purpose  of  estab 
lishing  therein  slaveholding  states."  In  1847  the  Demo 
cratic  legislature  of  New  York  passed  a  resolution  for  an 
"  unalterable,  fundamental  article  or  provision,  whereby 
slavery  or  involuntary  servitude,  except  as  a  punishment  for 
crime,  shall  be  forever  excluded  from  the  territory  acquired 
or  annexed"  from  Mexico;  in  Pennsylvania  the  same  year 
the  Democratic  legislature  put  itself  on  record  "  against  any 
measure  whatever,  by  which  territory  will  accrue  to  the 
Union,  unless  as  a  part  of  the  fundamental  law,  upon  which 
any  compact  or  treaty  for  this  purpose  is  based,  slavery  or 
involuntary  servitude,  except  for  crime,  shall  be  forever 
excluded."  The  Democratic  legislatures  of  Ohio,  Connect 
icut,  Illinois,  and  Wisconsin  took  the  same  position.  In 
1849  the  Democratic  state  convention  in  Indiana  resolved : 
"That  the  institution  of  human  slavery  is  at  variance  with 
the  theory  of  our  government,  abhorrent  to  the  common 
sentiment  of  mankind,  and  fraught  with  danger  to  all  who 
come  within  the  sphere  of  its  influence;  that  the  Federal 
government  possesses  adequate  power  to  inhibit  its  existence 
in  the  territories  of  the  Union;  that  the  constitutionality 
of  this  power  has  been  settled  by  judicial  construction,  by 
contemporaneous  exposition,  and  by  repeated  acts  of  Con 
gress,  and  that  we  enjoin  upon  our  senators  and  representa 
tives  in  Congress  to  make  every  exertion,  and  employ  all 
their  influence,  to  procure  the  passage  of  a  law  forever  ex 
cluding  slavery  from  the  territories  of  California  and  New 
Mexico."  In  1849  the  Democratic  state  convention  of 
Massachusetts  resolved:  "That  we  are  in  opposition  to 


158  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

slavery  in  every  form  and  color,  and  in  favor  of  freedom  and 
free  soil  wherever  man  lives,  throughout  God's  heritage. 
That  as  slavery  does  not  exist  by  any  municipal  law  in  the 
new  territories,  and  Congress  has  no  power  to  institute  it, 
the  local  laws  of  any  state,  authorizing  slavery,  can  never  be 
transplanted  there;  nor  can  slavery  exist  there  but  by  a 
local  law  of  the  territories,  sanctioned  by  Congress/' 

As  was  said  by  the  Republicans,  who  brought  all  these 
Democratic  resolutions  to  light,  here  was  "  pretty  good 
Republican  doctrine  coming  from  high  Democratic  author 
ity."  How  quickly  the  subservient  Northern  Democrats 
followed  their  Southern  brethren  away  from  freedom  into 
proslavery  ground  !  Through  what  a  proslavery  labyrinth 
of  aggression  had  the  Northern  Democrats  been  led  in  twelve 
short  years  !  Either  to  follow  Breckenridge  into  the  extreme 
professions  of  proslavery  or  to  follow  the  milk  and  water 
declarations  of  Douglas,  untouched  by  any  moral  enthusi 
asm  for  human  rights,  which  might  or  might  not  mean 
slavery,  to  do  either  of  these  things  was  to  take  a  step  that 
was  hardly  thought  of  in  the  North  in  1848.1 

These  Democratic  resolutions,  calling  for  the  prohibition 
of  slavery  in  the  territories,  distinctly  named  Congress  as 
the  agency  through  which  the  prohibition  was  to  be  accom 
plished.  This  reveals  a  second  sense  in  which  the  slave 
holders  were  working  a  revolution  in  general  party  principles. 
In  demanding  popular  sovereignty  on  the  subject  of  slavery 
in  the  territories  or  in  planting  themselves  on  the  Calhoun- 
Yancey-Taney  dogma,  they  were  in  either  case  getting  away 
from  Congressional  control  and  were  thus  departing  from 
previous  Congressional  practice.  From  1787  to  1847  Con 
gress,  on  at  least  eighteen  different  occasions,  and  during 
each  Democratic  administration,  exercised  power  over  the 
territories,  giving  them  officers  and  giving  or  withholding 

1  For  the  Democratic  resolutions,  see  the  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong., 
1  Sess.,  Vol.  II,  p.  2311. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  159 

approval  to  the  acts  of  territorial  legislatures.  From  1823 
to  1838  Congress  five  times  approved  of  the  laws  of  the 
territory  of  Florida  and  eleven  times  amended  them.  In 
Washington's  first  administration  the  Northwest  Ordinance 
of  1787  was  reenacted ;  in  that  of  John  Adams  the  same  was 
reenacted  for  the  newly  organized  territory  of  Indiana ;  in 
Jefferson's  time  the  territory  of  Orleans  was  organized  with 
slavery  and  certain  restrictions,  the  cession  of  the  Western 
lands  of  Georgia  accepted  with  restrictions,  and  Governor 
St.  Clair  of  the  Northwest  Territory  dismissed  from  office 
for  saying  that  an  organized  territory  was  without  the  control 
of  Congress;  Madison's  administrations  saw  the  arbitrary 
organization  of  the  territory  of  Missouri  by  Congress,  those 
of  Monroe  the  passage  of  the  Missouri  Compromise  with  its 
Congressional  restriction  of  slavery  in  the  territories, 
unanimously  approved  by  the  President  and  his  cabinet.1 
Under  Jackson  in  1836  a  law  was  enacted  that  "  no  act  of  the 
territorial  legislature,  incorporating  any  banking  institution, 
hereafter  to  be  passed,  shall  have  any  force  or  effect  whatever, 
until  approved  or  confirmed  by  Congress/'  and  under  this 
law  Jackson  twice  arrested  the  legislatures  of  Florida  and 
Wisconsin.  Van  Buren's  administration  saw  an  act  expressly 
retaining  for  Congress  power  over  the  laws  of  the  territory 
of  Iowa.  Polk  signed  the  act  for  the  organization  of  the 
territory  of  Oregon,  expressly  forbidding  slavery  therein. 
With  all  these  precedents  the  Democrats,  following  after  the 
principles  of  the  Dred  Scott  decision,  were  entirely  out  of 
harmony.2 

1  In  1848  in  the  Senate  Calhoun  denied  that  he  had  approved  of  the 
Missouri  restriction  while  he  had  been  a  member  of  the  Monroe  cabinet ; 
the  Republicans  later  gave  proof  to  the  contrary.     See  the  Congressional 
Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  XIV,  App.,  pp.  97  and  106. 

2  Buchanan  was  Folk's  Secretary  of  State.     In  the  Senate,  1860,  Pugh 
of  Ohio  declared  that  Polk  intended  to  veto  the  Wilmot  Proviso,  if  that 
measure  had  passed  the  two  houses  of  Congress ;  his  message  on  the  sub 
ject  the  President  brought  to  the  halls  of  Congress  with  him,  and  on  it, 


160  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Again,  on  the  question  of  the  territorial  slavery,  the  slave 
holders  were  leading  their  party  contrary  to  the  established 
dogmas  of  the  Supreme  Court  itself  as  these  had  been  promul 
gated  before  the  Dred  Scott  decision.  In  1810  this  court 
declared:  "The  power  of  governing  and  legislating  for  a 
territory  is  the  inevitable  consequence  of  the  right  to  acquire 
and  hold  territory.  Could  this  position  be  contested,  the 
Constitution  declares  :  '  Congress  shall  have  power  to  dispose 
of  and  make  all  needful  rules  and  regulations  respecting  the 
territory  and  other  property  belonging  to  the  United  States ' ; 
accordingly  we  find  Congress  possessing  and  exercising  the 
absolute  and  undisputed  power  of  governing  and  legislating 
for  the  territory  of  Orleans."  1  In  1828  the  same  tribunal 
laid  down  the  following:  "In  the  meantime  Florida  con 
tinues  to  be  a  territory  of  the  United  States,  governed  by 
that  clause  in  the  constitution  which  empowers  Congress  'to 
make  all  needful  rules  and  regulations/  Perhaps  the  power 
of  governing  a  territory  belonging  to  the  United  States, 
which  has  not,  by  becoming  a  state,  acquired  the  means  of 
self-government,  may  result  necessarily  from  the  facts  that 
it  is  not  within  the  jurisdiction  of  any  particular  state  and 
is  within  the  power  and  jurisdiction  of  the  United  States. 
The  right  to  govern  may  be  the  inevitable  consequence  of 
the  right  to  acquire  territory.  Whichever  may  be  the 
source  whence  the  power  may  be  derived,  the  possession  of 
it  is  unquestioned."  2 

though  never  an  official  document,  he  wrote  a  memorandum  of  his  in 
tention,  and  expressly  denied  the  power  of  Congress  over  the  territories. 
References  on  the  power  of  Congress  over  the  territories  are,  the  Con 
gressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  302,  839;  Vol.  II,  p.  1028; 
Vol.  IV,  App.,  p.  69.  It  cannot  be  said  that  Congress  always  exercised 
its  power  on  the  side  of  freedom,  for  it  perpetuated  slavery  in  the 
Western  cessions  of  North  Carolina  and  Georgia,  in  the  territory  of 
Orleans,  and  in  Florida. 

1  Sere  vs.  Pilot,  U.  S.  Supreme  Court  Reports,  VI  Cranch,  331. 

2  The  American   Insurance   Company  vs.  356  Bales  of  Cotton,  U.  S. 
Supreme  Court  Reports,'  I  Peters,  510.     See  also  the  Congressional  Globe, 
36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  I,  p.  304. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  161 

Finally,  through  their  bold  aggressions  in  the  interests  of 
slavery,  the  Democrats  shattered  their  former  devotion  to 
the  examples  and  precepts  of  "the  fathers."  The  mighty 
party  had  progressed  so  far  that  it  could  no  longer  derive 
sanction  and  authority  from  its  founder,  Thomas  Jefferson, 
and  his  compatriots,  while,  on  the  contrary,  the  hostile  Re 
publicans  were  going  to  these  very  sages  for  both  aid  and 
comfort.  Never  a  Republican  orator  omitted  reference  to 
the  strangeness  of  the  spectacle.  Douglasites  and  Brecken- 
ridgeites  alike  had  gone  astray.  In  this  connection  the 
following  campaign  document  was  very  effective. 

' '  We  hold  these  truths  to  be  self-evident,  that  all  men  are 
created  equal;  that  they  are  endowed  by  then:  Creator  with 
certain  inalienable  rights,  that  among  these  are  life,  liberty, 
and  the  pursuit  of  happiness/ —  Declaration  of  Independence. 

"I  don't  care  whether  slavery  is  voted  up  or  voted  down.7 

—  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS. 

11  It  is  among  my  first  wishes  to  see  some  plan  by  which 

slavery  may  be  abolished  by  law.'  -  -  GEORGE  WASHINGTON. 

"I  don't  care  whether  slavery  is  voted  up  or  voted  down.' 

—  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS. 

"Indeed  I  tremble  for  my  country  when  I  reflect  that  God 
is  just,  that  his  justice  cannot  sleep  forever ;  that  considering 
numbers,  nature,  and  natural  means  only,  a  revolution  of  the 
wheel  of  fortune,  an  exchange  of  situation,  is  among  possible 
events;  that  it  may  become  probable  by  supernatural  in 
terference;  the  Almighty  has  no  attribute  which  can  take 
sides  with  us  in  such  a  contest.'  -  -  THOMAS  JEFFERSON. 

"I  don't  care  whether  slavery  is  voted  up  or  voted  down/ 

—  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS. 

'  We  have  found  this  evil,  slavery,  has  preyed  upon  the 
very  vitals  of  the  Union,  and  has  been  prejudicial  to  the 
states  in  which  it  has  existed.'  —  JAMES  MONROE. 

"I  don't  care  whether  slavery  is  voted  up  or  voted  down.' 

—  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS. 


162  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Sir,  I  envy  neither  the  head  nor  the  heart  of  that  man 
from  the  North  who  rises  here  to  defend  slavery  on  principle.' 

—  JOHN  RANDOLPH. 

' '  I  don't  care  whether  slavery  is  voted  up  or  voted  down.' 

—  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS. 

' l  So  long  as  God  allows  the  vital  current  to  flow  through 
my  veins,  I  will  never,  never,  never,  by  thought  or  word,  by 
mind  or  will,  aid  in  admitting  one  rod  of  free  territory  to  the 
everlasting  curse  of  human  bondage.  .  .  .  Neither  can  I  be 
induced  by  any  earthly  power  to  extend  slavery  over  one 
foot  of  territory  now  free/  -  -  HENRY  CLAY. 

'  'I  don't  care  whether  slavery  is  voted  up,  or  voted  down.' 

—  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS."* 

Some  radical  Southerners  openly  repudiated  "the  fathers" 
and  proclaimed  their  own  superior  wisdom.  Senator  Wig- 
fall  used  the  following  picturesque  words :  "I  intend,  Sir,  to 
answer  the  twaddle  about  the  fathers.  There  has  been 
enough  of  that  thing  talked  of.  We  are  wiser  than  they 
were.  We  are  the  old  men  and  they  are  the  young  men. 
I  care  not  what  their  age  or  experience  was.  They  organized 
this  government,  and  the  wisest  man  in  that  day  could  not 
tell  how  the  thing  would  operate ;  it  was  utterly  impossible. 
We  have  the  experience  of  seventy  years.  There  are  men 
now  —  I  do  not  speak  of  myself  —  who  have  as  much  edu 
cation,  as  much  brains  as  they  had.  We  have  seen  the 
experiment  operating  for  seventy  years.  It  is  twaddle  to 
talk  about  the  wisdom  of  our  ancestors,  and  every  man  knows 
it.  Who  is  there  that,  at  fifty  years  of  age,  would  like 
to  be  bound  by  his  judgment  at  twenty  or  twenty-five  years  ? 
What  nation  is  there  that  is  one  hundred  years  old,  that  would 
consent  to  be  governed  by  the  wisdom  of  the  past  century? 
What  would  be  said  of  our  arrogance  and  presumption  if  we 
were  to  pass  a  law  here  now  that  was  not  to  be  repealed  for 
one  hundred  years?  .  .  .  They  legislated  for  themselves. 

1  The  New  Haven  Daily  Palladium,  September  10,  1860. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  163 

We  have  to  legislate  for  ourselves."  Yancey,  referring  back 
to  the  Revolution,  believed  that  the  "old  fogies  of  that  day 
entertained  opinions  in  relation  to  slavery  which  we  of  this 
day  are  unanimously  agreed  are  not  sound."  1 

At  the  beginning  of  the  presidential  campaign  positive 
Democratic  aggression  was  patent  to  all.  The  party  was 
reaching  out  in  every  direction  for  more  lands  to  conquer  for 
human  slavery,  and  in  assuming  this  position  it  was  breaking 
with  Democratic  principles  of  former  days,  with  the  declara 
tions  for  freedom  of  the  late  forties,  the  uniform  practices  of 
Congress  for  the  past  half  century,  Supreme  Court  declara 
tions  with  one  important  exception,  and  the  advice  and 
wisdom  of  the  founders  of  the  Republic.  An  entirely  new 
page  in  the  nation's  history  would  be  turned  if  the  proposed 
schemes  should  be  enacted  into  law.  But  before  the  end  of 
the  campaign  more  portentous  aggression  loomed  over  the 
horizon.  This  was  secession  from  the  Union,  not  yet  a  gen 
erally  accepted  policy,  but  a  threat. 

Arguments  on  the  threatened  secession  abounded.  The 
first  contention  of  the  Southerners  in  favor  of  the  step  hinged 
about  the  insidious  dangers  to  slavery  that  would  lurk  in  a 
Republican  administration.  Horace  Greeley  and  other  Re 
publicans  said  that  they  would  not  touch  slavery  in  the 
states,  but  would  content  themselves  with  attacking  it  in 
ways  which  were  wholly  constitutional ;  Southerners,  on  the 
other  hand,  believed  that  a  Republican  administration,  no 
matter  how  faithful  to  the  constitution,  could  not  help  under 
mining  their  institution.  Under  such  a  rule  at  Washington 
the  whole  fabric  of  slavocracy's  imperialism  would  totter  and 
fall  as  in  a  dream ;  Cuba,  Mexico,  and  the  more  Northern  of 
the  South  American  states  would  recede  from  their  grasp, 
the  territories  in  the  Western  part  of  the  United  States 
together  with  the  free  Northern  states  would  be  forever 

1  The  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  II,  p.  1657 ;  the  New 
York  Times,  November  3,  1860. 


164  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

dedicated  to  freedom,  and  new  executive  vigor  would  effectu 
ally  curb  the  reviving  slave  trade.  Freedom  would  intrench 
itself  more  firmly  by  carving  out  new  free  states  in  the  West 
ern  country.  The  Supreme  Court  and  the  other  courts  of  the 
United  States  would  pass  over  to  the  control  of  antislavery, 
as  vacancy  after  vacancy  gave  the  new  administration  op 
portunities  to  elevate  to  the  bench  the  partisans  of  freedom ; 
there  would  be  no  more  Dred  Scott  decisions,  the  Lemmon 
case  would  be  lost  to  the  South,  and  on  the  slave  traders  the 
extreme  penalty  of  death  would  be  imposed  and  the  sentence 
carried  out.  Negroes,  recognized  as  citizens,  would  be 
allowed  to  take  up  public  land  in  the  West,  a  privilege  pre 
viously  denied  them ;  in  the  foreign  consulates  and  embassies 
they  would  be  received  and  welcomed  as  citizens  and  freely 
given  passports,  another,  privilege  theretofore  denied  them. 
Skillful  use  of  executivfe  patronage  would  permeate  the 
South,  and  with  the  appearance  there  of  Republican  post 
masters  and  custom  house  officers  an  incipient  Republican 
party  would  take  root  in  the  very  land  of  slavery ;  for  the 
temptations  of  office-holding  to  Southerners,  who  notoriously 
loved  office,  would  be  irresistible.  Rescues  of  fugitives,  gen 
eral  assistance  in  their  favor,  and  defiances  to  the  national 
fugitive  slave  law  would  multiply ;  practically  no  fugitives 
would  ever  be  returned.  More  John  Browns  and  Hinton 
Rowan  Helpers,  more  attacks  on  slavery  in  the  Border  states, 
would  be  bound  to  follow ;  for,  if  these  aggressions  could  hap 
pen  under  a  Democratic  regime,  fully  devoted  to  proslavery 
interests,  how  much  more  liable  would  they  be  with  Lincoln 
in  the  presidential  chair,  working  on  the  principle  that  the 
nation  was  bound  to  become  all  free  or  all  slave,  and  with 
Seward  in  the  Cabinet  openly  stating  that  slavery  was  bound 
to  disappear  and  ought  to  disappear !  Finally,  in  further 
plunder  of  the  slaveholders,  a  high  protective  tariff  would 
be  passed  by  the  national  Congress,  wholly  in  the  interests  of 
the  North. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  165 

Thus.,  would  a  Republican  administration  destroy  the 
equality  of  the  South  in  the  Union,  and  ultimately  reduce 
the  states  of  that  section  to  the  condition  of  mere  provinces 
of  a  consolidated  despotism,  to  be  governed  by  a  fixed  ma 
jority  in  Congress  hostile  to  Southern  interests  and  fatally 
bent  on  the  ruin  of  Southern  institutions.  To  acquiesce  in 
such  a  f ate  "  would  be  to  emulate  the  infatuation  of  the  Numid- 
ian  king,  who  delivered  his  treasures,  his  arms,  his  elephants, 
and  his  deserters  to  the  Romans  and  then  renewed  the  war, 
after  having  needlessly  deprived  himself  of  the  means  of 
defense."  1  "The  South  will  never  permit  Abraham  LincohT  ! 
to  be  inaugurated  President  of  the  United  States,"  declared  a 
Southern  writer;  "this  is  a  settled  and  a  sealed  fact.  It  is 
the  determination  of  all  parties  in  the  South.  Let  the  con 
sequences  be  what  they  may,  whether  the  Potomac  is  crim 
soned  in  human  gore,  and  Pennsylvania  Avenue  is  paved  ten 
fathoms  deep  with  mangled  bodies,  or  whether  the  last  ves 
tige  of  liberty  is  swept  from  the  face  of  the  American  conti 
nent,  the  South,  the  loyal  South,  the  constitutional  South, 
will  never  submit  to  such  humiliation  and  degradation  as  the 
inauguration  of  Abraham  Lincoln."  2 

With  irresistible  felicity  William  L.  Yancey  summed  up  the 
Southern  position  at  Cooper  Institute  in  New  York :  "Who 
is  more  sovereign  than  the  parties  that  have  the  reserved 
rights  guaranteed  to  them  ?  They  have  made  this  a  govern 
ment  existing  on  the  will  of  sovereign  states,  a  compact 
between  sovereign  states,  not  made  states  by  force,  not  made 
consolidated  masses  by  the  conquering  march  of  a  hero, 
with  his  army  at  his  back  and  his  sword  thrown  into  the  scale, 
where  the  will  of  the  conquered  is  not  consulted.  That  is 
not  our  form  of  government.  Ours  is  a  form  of  government 

1  The  view  of  Hon.  W.  W.  Boyce  of  South  Carolina ;  see  the  New  York 
Herald,  August  13,  1860. 

2  The  New  York  Times,  August  7,  1860,  quoting  from  the  Southern 
Confederacy  of  Atlanta,  Georgia. 


166  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

that  the  people  have  willed.  It  is  self-government.  It  is  a 
government  where  the  states  have  willed  to  make  a  compact 
with  each  other;  and  whenever  that  compact  is  violated, 
who  is  there  higher  than  the  states  ?  Who  is  more  sovereign 
than  the  parties  to  the  contract,  who  have  the  reserved 
rights  guaranteed  to  them?  There  are  rights  reserved  to 
the  states.  The  constitution  itself  guarantees  them ;  and 
there  is  the  great  right  that  rises  above  all,  revolution,  be 
cause  it  is  the  right  of  humanity,  the  right  of  civilization, 
the  right  of  an  intelligent  public  opinion,  the  right  of  free 
men,  and  that  is,  that  when  governments  become  oppressive 
and  subversive  of  the  rights  for  which  they  were  founded, 
then,  in  the  language  of  our  fathers,  they  have  the  right  to 
form  a  new  government.  Governments  should  not  be 
changed  for  light  or  transient  causes,  but  whenever  the  whole 
property  of  an  entire  community  is  swept  away  by  a  policy 
that  undermines  it,  or  deals  it  a  death  blow  directly ;  when 
the  social  relations  of  an  enlightened  and  Christian  people 
shall  be  utterly  destroyed  by  a  policy  which  invidiously 
undermines  them,  and  produces  inevitably  a  contest  between 
castes  and  races ;  when  these  rights  are  touched  upon,  and 
the  people  see  that  the  attack  is  coming,  they  will  not  wait 
until  the  policy  is  clenched  upon  them.  The  very  moment 
their  equality  is  destroyed  in  the  government  under  the 
constitution,  then,  in  my  opinion,  it  becomes  the  duty  of 
the  state  to  protect  its  people  by  interposing  its  reserved 
rights  between  the  acts  of  the  general  government  and  its 
people.  And  when  it  does  that,  if  Abraham  Lincoln,  or  any 
other  man  who  aids  Abraham  Lincoln  or  any  other  man  in 
the  presidential  office,  shall  undertake  to  use  Federal  bay 
onets  to  coerce  a  free  and  sovereign  state  in  this  Union 
(I  answer  that  question  as  an  individual  because  it  does  not 
involve  my  state),  I  shall  fly  to  the  standard  of  that  state, 
and  give  it  the  best  assistance  in  my  power.  .  .  .  But, 
gentlemen,  this  is  the  time,  this  is  the  place,  this  almost  the 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  167 

hour  for  you  to  decide  —  what  ?  That  your  constitution 
and  your  government  shall  not  be  put  to  such  desperate 
straits.  .  .  .  Give  us  a  fair  showing.  It  is  all  we  ask. 
Give  us  an  equal  chance  with  you.  It  is  all  we  ask.  Tram 
mel  not  our  civilization  and  our  industry  with  your  schemes 
of  emancipation,  your  schemes  of  abolition,  your  schemes  to 
encourage  raids  upon  us.  Give  us  the  showing  we  give  you. 
Hands  off  !  Meet  us  in  generous  rivalry ;  and  he  who  con 
quers  in  the  strife  is  a  conqueror  indeed,  because  the  victory 
will  be  given  to  him  as  the  just  meed  of  superior  sagacity, 
superior  intelligence,  and  superior  virtue;  and  whenever 
you  get  to  be  superior  to  the  South  in  these  things,  gentlemen, 
we  will  bow  in  reverence  before  you."  1 

The  property  argument  for  the  aggressive  step  of  secession 
was  of  great  weight.  In  1850,  with  a  cotton  crop  of  2,334,000 
bales,  1,590,000  bales  were  exported ;  in  1859,  with  a  crop  of 
4,019,000  bales,  3,021,000  bales  were  exported.  In  the  same 
interval  home  consumption  of  cotton  jumped  from  613,- 
000  bales  to  928,000  bales.  Prices  per  pound,  which  in 
the  forties  were  only  eight  and  nine  cents,  now  averaged 
twelve  cents.2  In  1850  in  New  Orleans  good  field  hands  sold 
for  from  $800  to  $1200,  early  in  1860  for  from  $2200  to  $2500  ; 
the  increase  in  slave  values  in  ten  years  was  one  hundred 
per  cent.  Cotton,  therefore,  was  a  very  valuable  crop,  the 
negroes  who  cultivated  it  so  valuable  as  to  be  well-nigh  in 
dispensable.  This  one  source  of  prosperity  was  enormous, 
was  rapidly  increasing,  and  would  continue  just  as  long  as 
slavery  was  secure  —  no  longer.  The  ordinary  instincts 
of  business  prudence,  which  aim  chiefly  at  self-preservation 
and  grow  timid  at  the  least  flutter  of  insecurity  and  danger, 
could  dictate  nothing  else  than  getting  away  from  the  active 

1  See  p.  301  for  this  speech  in  full. 

2  The  Cotton  Industry,  An  Essay  in  American  Economic  History,  by 
M.  B.  Hammond.     (Publications  of  the  American  Economic  Association.) 
New  York  and  London,  1897,  App.  I. 


168  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

source  of  agitation  and  trouble.  Under  the  same  circum 
stances  every  large  business  interest  would  embrace  secession. 
The  four  million  slaves,  said  Yancey,  were  worth,  at  Virginia 
prices,  two  billion  eight  hundred  million  dollars;  the  vast 
property  demanded  to  be  let  alone,  and  with  a  Republican 
administration  at  Washington  it  would  not  be  let  alone. 

The  following  bombastic  sentiments  could  be  duplicated 
from  contemporaneous  utterances  a  hundred  times,  so  com 
monly  held  were  its  sentiments  and  arguments  for  secession. 
Cotton  was  king,  and  rather  than  be  deprived  of  it  Europe 
would  surely  rush  to  its  defense  and  aid  secession.  "Is  it 
possible,  aside  from  this  statistical  view  of  it,  to  say  what 
cotton  has  done  for  mankind  ?  Has  any  man  yet  attempted 
to  estimate  the  influence,  moral,  political,  and  physical,  which 
that  delicate  and  beautiful  plant  exercises  on  the  destinies 
of  man?  Silent  and  unseen,  yet  all  powerful  and  univer 
sally  pervasive,  its  influence  may  not  inaptly  be  compared  to 
the  light  of  the  sun.  ...  So,  abstract  our  cotton  crop  from 
commerce,  and  behold,  if  you  can,  without  a  shudder  of 
horror,  the  fearful  picture.  Verily,  there  would  be  curses  of 
despair  on  'Change,  and  wailings  in  the  palaces  of  the  world's 
merchant  princes.  Aye,  and  worse  than  this,  there  would 
be  wailings  in  the  cabins  of  the  poor,  and  cries  of  strong  men 
and  suffering  women  and  starving  children  would  ascend 
together ;  remorseless  crime  would  stalk  forth  from  its  dark 
cells,  and  soon  the  midnight  air  would  be  frozen  with  the  cry 
of  'murder/  and  the  stars  in  the  vaults  of  Heaven  would  be 
eclipsed  in  the  conflagration  of  cities  whose  people  were  fed 
and  clothed  with  cotton.  Great  Britain  alone  is  estimated 
to  have  two  million  employees  in  her  cotton  factories.  Add 
to  this  number  those  who  are  dependent  on  these  employees 
for  subsistence,  and  we  have  by  estimation,  not  less  than  six 
million  souls  in  the  British  Empire  whose  meat  and  drink 
and  clothing  and  shelter  come  of  this  cotton  !  It  is  literally 
their  life's  blood.  Without  but  one  year's  supply  of  cotton 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  169 

from  these  factories,  and  horresco  referens !  Fancy,  if  you 
can,  this  vast  multitude  of  gaunt  and  desperate  men,  with 
the  lean  and  bony  fingers  of  famine  throttling  their  suffering 
wives  and  helpless  babes,  rushing  through  the  land  and  crying 
for  bread.  Never  since  the  Egyptian  mothers  tore  their  hair 
and  smote  their  breasts  over  the  prostrate  forms  of  their  first 
born  after  the  dread  visitation  of  the  Angel  of  Death,  has  such 
a  wail  gone  up  to  the  throne  of  God  as  that  which  would  pour 
into  the  ears  of  the  British  Government.  It  could  not  stand 
six  months.  No,  sir;  not  all  the  bayonets  that  won  at 
Waterloo ;  not  all  the  guns  that  blew  up  the  ramparts  at 
Sebastopol,  could  stop  the  wild  fury  of  these  desperate  men, 
with  death  alike  behind  and  before  them.  Where  would 
be  Liverpool  ?  and  where  Manchester  and  her  kindred 
cities,  whose  swarming  thousands  literally  breathe  an  atmos 
phere  of  cotton?  The  everlasting  clang  of  their  vast  ma 
chinery,  the  roar  of  their  snorting  engines,  and  the  busy  hum 
that  marks  so  much  industry,  would  be  forever  hushed ;  the 
stillness  of  death  would  reign  in  the  streets,  or  the  silence 
would  be  fearfully  broken  by  the  shouts  of  a  raging  and  law 
less  mob.  Their  desolation  could  not  be  more  complete 
were  the  plowshare  guided  over  their  foundation  stones,  and 
salt,  the  emblem  of  utter  barrenness,  sown  in  the  blackened 
furrow  !  .  .  . 

"Does  any  man  imagine  that  I  exaggerate  the  importance 
of  cotton  and  its  fabrics  ?  If  so,  let  him  examine  the  statis 
tics  for  himself.  Let  him  examine  the  British  press,  and  the 
writings  of  the  leading  economists  on  the  subject.  A  learned 
writer  in  Blackwood's  Magazine,  referring  to  this  subject, 
says:  'With  its  increased  growth  (that  is,  of  cotton),  has 
sprung  up  that  mercantile  navy,  which  now  waves  its  stripes 
and  stars  over  every  sea,  and  that  foreign  influence  which 
has  placed  the  internal  peace,  we  may  say,  the  subsistence  of 
millions  in  every  manufacturing  country  in  Europe,  within 
the  power  of  an  oligarchy  of  planters/  The  London  Econo- 


170  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

mist,  on  the  same  subject,  holds  the  following  language : 
'The  lives  of  nearly  two  millions  of  our  countrymen  are  de 
pendent  on  the  cotton  crops  of  America ;  their  destiny  may 
be  said,  without  any  kind  of  hyperbole,  to  hang  upon  a 
thread.  Should  any  dire  calamity  befall  the  land  of  cotton,  a 
thousand  of  our  merchant  ships  would  rot  idly  at  dock ;  ten 
thousand  mills  must  stop  their  busy  looms ;  ten  thousand 
mouths  would  starve  from  lack  of  food  to  feed  them  ! '  "  1 
The  same  reliance  on  King  Cotton,  the  same  hopes,  were 
staked  on  its  influence  in  the  Northern  states.  Continuing, 
the  speaker  last  quoted  said:  "In  the  United  States  the 
effect  would  only  be  less  dreadful,  because  we  have  greater 
resources  for  feeding  our  more  widely  spread  population,  and 
because  there  are  fewer  of  our  people  engaged  in  manufac 
turing.  But  no  sane  man  can  doubt  that  it  would  be  frightful 
to  contemplate.  If  a  little  temporary  derangement  of  our 
financial  condition  could  produce  such  distress  and  terror 
throughout  the  land  as  was  witnessed  through  the  pressure  of 
1857,  what  would  be  the  effects  were  this  four  million,  five 
hundred  thousand  bales  of  cotton,  forming  two-thirds  of  all 
that  we  export  to  foreign  countries,  suddenly  to  fail  us? 
Grass  would  grow  in  the  streets  of  many  a  lovely  New 
England  village;  and  many  a  haughty  trader,  who  now 
dwells  in  a  marble  palace,  would  come  down  to  the  dust  of 
poverty  and  humiliation,  dragging  with  him  all  that  was 
lovely  and  delicate  in  his  household.  The  source  of  three- 
fifths  of  all  your  wealth  and  prosperity  being  gone,  the  strikes 
which  now  disturb  your  business  and  alarm  your  capitalists 
would  be  tinged  with  revolution  and  stained  with  blood. 
The  misery  and  suffering  which  would  sweep  through  the 
land,  with  all  their  attendant  evils,  would  be  such  as  make 
you  regard  your  Lawrence  tragedies  2  and  present  social 

JThe  Congressional  Globe,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  Vol.  II,  p.  1160-1161. 
This  is  from  a  speech  by  Vance  of  North  Carolina. 

2  The  fall  of  the  Pemberton  mills  of  Lawrence,  Massachusetts,  is  here 
referred  to ;  many  operatives  were  killed. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  171 

difficulties  as  indeed  but  a  merciful  visitation.  The  imperial 
city  of  New  York  would  be  shaken  to  the  center.  Not  only 
the  great  traffic  in  cotton,  but  her  entire  trade  with  the  South, 
would  be  cut  off.  We  could  not  trade  there ;  for  without  our 
cotton  we  would  have  little  to  trade  with.  Many  a  great 
mercantile  house  would  be  closed,  and  the  names  of  its  part 
ners  paraded  in  the  lists  of  bankruptcy.  Great  clipper  ships 
would  rot  at  their  wharves  and  the  worm  of  decay  would  eat 
into  their  timbers,  for  lack  of  that  cotton  and  its  fabrics,  with 
which  their  holds  were  once  so  richly  freighted.  The  white 
sails  of  our  vast  merchant  marine,  equal  to  any  in  the  world, 
would  no  longer  'float  in  every  breeze  under  the  whole 
heavens/  but  general  ruin  and  dismay  would  pervade  all 
ranks  and  classes  of  men." 

The  North  and  all  Europe,  said  another,  were  more  inter 
ested  than  the  South  that  the  cotton  crop  should  be  supplied 
uninterruptedly  Entrenched  behind  the  universal  want 
of  the  civilized  world,  the  South  was  holding  all  countries 
under  bond  to  keep  the  peace.  Neither  the  Northern  states 
nor  Europe  dared  disregard  cotton ;  nay !  Europe  did  not 
dare  to  permit  the  North  to  disregard  it. 

The  high  tariff,  to  which  the  North  was  committed,  con 
stituted  another  secession  argument.  England,  as  the 
great  manufacturing  and  trading  rival  of  the  Northern 
states,  would  avail  itself  of  the  offer  of  free  trade  in  a  new 
Southern  Confederacy,  go  in  there,  win  that  market  away 
from  the  Northern  states,  and  protect  it.  Secession  and 
free  trade  would  give  the  English  manufacturers  a  chance  to 
crush  the  Yankee  competitors. 

In  an  independent  Southern  Republic  the  patent  laws  of 
the  United  States  could  be  broken  and  patents  stolen  with 
impunity;  debts  due  the  hated  Northerners  could  be 
repudiated.1 

1  The  New  York  Times,  October  30,  1860,  quotes  the  Charleston  Mer 
cury  at  length  on  this  point. 


172  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

The  Northwestern  states,  which  were  more  closely  iden 
tified  with  the  South  than  with  the  North,  would  follow  the 
South  into  secession,  for  the  magnificent  river  that  flowed 
through  their  limits  joined  the  two  sections,  the  Northwest 
and  the  South,  in  stronger  bonds  of  unity  than  could  pos 
sibly  be  established  between  the  East  and  the  West  by  the 
\,  "mere  hooks  of  steel,"  — the  railroads. 

Contrariwise,  there  were  Southern  arguments  against 
secession.  That  which  would  •  now  seem  the  strongest 
argument  against  the  movement,  namely,  the  expense,  the 
extra  taxation  involved,  seems  scarcely  to  have  been  con 
sidered.  A  careful  search  of  the  Southern  press  nowhere 
reveals  that  the  point  was  emphasized,  for  it  is  found  in  only 
scattered  references.1  Doubtless  the  great  determination 
of  the  slaveholders,  their  passionate  excitement,  their  pros 
perity  and  their  reliance  on  King  Cotton  for  speedy  foreign 
aid,  would  in  part  explain  this  unexpected  turn.  Some  were 
deterred  by  the  expected  certainty  of  a  servile  insurrection 
after  secession.  The  only  consideration  that  at  any  moment 
prevented  such  an  uprising  was  the  belief  of  the  negroes  that 
the  whole  power  of  the  central  government  would  be  brought 
to  bear  against  them.  "Fancy  four  million  blacks,  with 
their  tropical  blood,  intermixed  with  the  more  nervous  blood 
of  their  masters,  boiling  in  their  veins,  with  the  memory  of 
a  lifetime  of  oppression  urging  them  on,  maddened  by  the 
desire  for  gratification  of  their  long-smothered  revenge,  and 
with  the  full  consciousness  that  they  must  triumph  or  meet  a 
fate  far  worse  than  death,  —  fancy  these  men,  animated  by 

1  This  observation  applies  only  to  the  period  of  the  presidential  cam 
paign  ;  later  in  the  controversy,  the  fear  of  taxation  may  have  loomed 
larger  in  the  South.  One  difficulty  as  to  internal  taxation  in  the  South 
was  pointed  out,  the  struggle  that  would  inevitably  ensue  between  the 
mountainous  antislavery  sections  and  the  proslavery  seaboard  sections 
on  the  subject  of  taxation  of  slaves.  This  was  already  a  burning  ques 
tion  in  the  local  politics  of  Virginia  and  North  Carolina.  It  was  ex 
pected  that  this  controversy  would  wax  warmer  after  secession. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  173 

this  spirit,  engaged  in  a  life  or  death  struggle  with  the  whites 
of  the  South,  and  you  have  a  picture  of  what  must  occur  in 
every  Southern  state  if  they  resolve  to  destroy  the  only 
safeguard  which  they  now  have  —  the  Union  of  the  states."  1 

Secession  would  be  unwise,  it  was  urged  in  other  quarters, 
in  so  far  as  it  would  increase  the  antislavery  spirit  of  the 
North  and  cause  the  Northern  supporters  of  the  South  to 
disappear.  It  was  urged,  too,  that  there  was  an  element 
of  impracticability  in  such  a  movement,  because  one  seces 
sion  involved  others;  from  the  proposed  Southern  Con 
federacy  itself,  first  one  state  might  withdraw,  then  another 
and  another,  until  but  one  was  left.  From  what  could  that 
single  state  withdraw?  Only  confusion,  eternal  bickerings 
between  states,  could  result.2  What  right  to  secede  from 
the  Union  had  Florida  and  Louisiana,  purchased  and  brought 
into  the  Union  by  the  common  treasure?  What  right  had 
Texas,  bought  with  the  blood  of  the  soldiers  of  all  the 
Union? 

The  question  as  to  when  and  how  to  carry  secession  into 
effect  was  often  considered;  should  it  be  precipitated  after 
the  election  of  Lincoln,  after  his  inauguration,  or  after  some 
overt  act  of  hostility  to  the  South  by  his  administration? 
What  constituted  an  overt  act?  and  how  should  secession 
be  accomplished,  —  by  one  state  after  another,  by  a  number 
of  states  acting  together,  or  by  a  convention  of  them  all  ?  It 
came  commonly  to  be  agreed  that  the  affronted  states  should 
effect  secession  while  Buchanan  was  still  in  office,  for  it  was 
believed  that  as  President  he  would  not  raise  his  hand  in 
opposition,  whereas  it  was  feared  that  Lincoln  would  offer 
strenuous  opposition.3 

1  The  New   York  Herald,  August  1,   1860,  quoting  from  the  Chicago 
Democrat. 

2  This  idea  was  drawn  from  a  letter  written  by  Thomas  Jefferson, 
January  1,  1796. 

3  This  sentiment  as  to  President  Buchanan  was  repeatedly  expressed 
in  the  South. 


174  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

The  attitude  of  the  four  political  parties  on  the  subject  of 
secession  may  easily  be  traced. 

No  party,  North  or  South,  either  through  its  platform  or 
through  the  utterances  of  its  candidates,  openly  avowed 
secession ;  but  in  the  South,  the  home  of  disruption,  where 
out  of  three  political  parties,  two  were  openly  and  aggres 
sively  for  the  Union,  one  at  least  was  lukewarm  in  its  union 
professions.  This  was  the  Breckenridge  Democracy,  and 
its  candidate  may  speak  for  himself. 

"All  over  the  country  the  charge  of  disunion  is  made 
against  me  by  anonymous  writers  and  wandering  orators. 
Their  whole  stock  in  trade  is  l  disunion,  disunion/  Their 
continual  cry  is  that  this  man  and  his  party  are  attempting 
to  break  up  the  Union  of  the  states.  We  say,  how  can  prin 
ciples  be  sectional  or  disunionist  which  are  based  strictly 
upon  the  constitution Tj  And  the  large  number  of  young 
gentlemen  who  are  ringing  bells,1  with  tongues  as  long  and 
heads  as  empty  as  the  bells  which  they  are  ringing,  cry 
' disunion,  disunion.'  From  sources  yet  more  eminent  comes 
the  information  that  I  and  the  political  organization  with 
which  I  am  connected,  are  laboring  for  a  disruption  of  the 
Confederacy.  I  do  not  reply  now  to  what  Mr.  Douglas 
says  all  over  New  England,  in  Virginia,  and  wherever  he 
goes,  because  it  is  quite  natural  for  a  gentleman  as  much 
interested  as  he  to  think  that  any  man  who  opposes  his 
principles  must  be  a  disunionist.  Indeed,  by  his  decla 
rations  we  must  all  be  disunionists  in  Kentucky,  for  he 
declares  that  those  who  assert  that  territorial  legislatures 
have  no  power  to  exclude  slave  property,  and  that  Congress 
should  interfere  for  its  protection,  are  disunionists,  and  that 

1  This  is  a  sarcastic  reference  to  the  fact  that  the  supporters  of  Bell 
and  Everett  took  to  ringing  bells  as  a  campaign  demonstration.  This  was 
common  among  the  Bell  men  both  in  the  North  and  in  the  South.  In 
New  York  State,  where  the  Bell  and  Everett  party,  by  fusion,  sold  out 
to  the  two  Democratic  factions,  Republicans  followed  the  Bell  and  Everett 
processions,  ringing  bells  and  crying  "Auction,  auction!!! 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  175 

is  what  the  whole  legislature  of  Kentucky  said  last  year.  -In 
my  own  state,  where,  I  trust,  my  character  and  antecedents 
are  known,  one  of  the  oldest  and  most  eminent  of  our  public 
men  has  not  said  that  I  was  a  disunionist,  but  has  intimated 
that  I  am  connected  with  an  organization  whose  bone  and 
body  are  disunion.  .  .  .  The  man  does  not  live  who  has 
power  to  couple  my  name  successfully  with  the  slightest 
taint  of  disloyalty  to  the  constitution  and  the  Union.  .  .  . 
Now,  if  it  be  true  that  I  am  not  a  disunionist,  and  if  it  be 
true  that  the  political  principles  I  advocate  are  not  dis 
unionist  principles,  but  the  principles  of  the  constitution,  is 
it  not  rather  hard  to  establish  disunion  on  sound  men  with 
constitutional  principles?  That,  gentlemen,  would  seem 
to  exhaust  the  subject,  — sound  men  with  constitutional 
principles,  which  principles  I  have  announced  in  the  form 
recognized  in  American  politics,  to  be  asserted  by  means  of 
the  ballot  box."  1 

The  ardent  Union  parties  of  the  South,  the  Bell-Everetts 
and  the  Douglasites,  after  these  pusillanimous'"words,  which 
were  all  that  the  candidate  dared  to  speak  in  answer  to  defi 
nite  questions  as  to  how  he  stood  on  the  subjects  of  secession 
•and  Federal  coercion  of  states,2  gave  themselves  no  rest  ; 
then-  cue  was  to  force  the  Breckenridgeites  out  into  the  open 
and  convict  them  of  their  true  secessionist  sentiment,  and 
they  gave  themselves  to  the  attack  with  unwonted  vehe 
mence.  Secession  was  hurled  at  the  Southern  Democracy  from 
every  side.  Candidate  Breckenridge's  sentiments  were  vague 
and  hollow ;  they  did  not  glow  with  frank  love  of  the  Union ; 
the  speaker  hedged.  He  who  was  not  openly  and  ardently 
for  the  Union,  was  against  it.  Moreover,  hot-headed,  out- 
and-out  secessionists  in  every  Southern  state  belonged  to  the 

1  The  New  York  Herald,  September  6,  1860.     This  paper  here  gives  in 
full  one  of  the  very  few  political  speeches  Breckenridge  delivered  in  the 
campaign.     The  place  was  Lexington,  Kentucky,  Breckenridge's  home. 

2  See  pp.  180-181. 


176  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Breckenridge  party,  and  to  their  words,  always  in  evidence, 
appeal  was  made. 

Several  sensational  documents  revealed  Yancey's  position 
with  merciless  precision.  That  great  leader,  the  soul  of  the 
Breckenridge  party,  questioned  by  many  a  Northern  audi 
ence  in  the  height  of  the  campaign,  persistently  refused  to 
tell  in  the  crisis,  one  way  or  the  other,  what  were  his  senti 
ments  as  regarded  secession ;  it  was  a  question  for  his  state 
to  decide  after  the  election,  and  he  would  go  with  his  state.1 
But  in  the  months  immediately  preceding  the  presidential 
campaign  he  had  often  expressed  himself  on  the  subject 
in  words  as  eloquent  as  any  campaign  speech,  and  news 
paper  readers  came  to  know  the  record  by  heart,  so  often 
was  it  laid  before  them  by  the  hostile  press. 

Welcoming  the  Southern  commercial  convention  in  Mont 
gomery,  Alabama,  May,  1858,  he  used  the  following  words  : 
"I  must  be  allowed,  at  least  on  my  behalf,  to  welcome  you, 
too,  as  but  the  foreshadowing  of  that  far  more  important 
body,  important  as  you  evidently  will  be,  that,  if  injustice 
and  wrong  shall  continue  to  rule  the  councils  of  the  domi 
nant  section  of  the  country,  must,  ere  long,  assemble  on 
Southern  soil,  for  the  purpose  of  devising  some  measure  by 
which  not  only  your  industrial,  but  your  social  and  political 
relations,  shall  be  placed  on  the  basis  of  an  independent 
sovereignty,  which  will  have  within  itself  a  unity  of  climate, 
a  unity  of  soil,  a  unity  of  production,  and  a  unity  of  social 
relation ;  that  unity  which  alone  can  be  the  basis  of  a  suc 
cessful  and  permanent  government."  Within  a  month's  time 
he  wrote  to  James  S.  Slaughter  in  regard  to  prompt  resist 
ance  to  the  next  Northern  aggression:  "It  must  come  in 
the  nature  of  things.  No  national  party  can  save  us; 
no  sectional  party  can  even  do  it,  but  if  we  could  do  as  our 

1  See  his  words  in  New  York,  pp.  322-328.  In  this  speech,  he  did  allow 
himself  to  declare  against  coercion  of  a  state  by  the  national  government 
to  prevent  secession.  For  the  answer  in  Baltimore,  see  p.  215. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  177 

fathers  did,  organize  committees  of  safety  all  over  the 
Southern  states,  and  it  is  only  in  them  that  we  can  hope  for 
any  effective  movement,  we  shall  fire  the  Southern  heart, 
instruct  the  Southern  mind,  give  courage  to  each  other,  and 
at  the  proper  moment,  by  one  organized  concerted  action, 
we  can  precipitate  the  cotton  states  into  a  revolution/'  In 
Montgomery,  Alabama,  a  few  weeks  later,  he  organized  a 
lodge  of  the  "  League  of  the  United  Southerners/7  in  the 
preamble  of  whose  constitution  ran  these  words:  "And 
believing  further  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the  South  to  use  all 
proper  means  to  sustain  her  rights  within  the  Union,  with  a 
view  to  being  justified  before  the  world  in  resuming  the 
powers  she  has  delegated  to  the  general  government,  in 
the  event  she  fails  to  obtain  justice  in  the  Union,  we  organ 
ize  ourselves  under  the  following  constitution."  The  motto 
of  the  society,  of  which  numerous  branches  were  formed, 
was  "A  Southern  Republic  is  our  only  safety."  A  month 
or  so  later,  explanatory  of  the  Slaughter  letter,  he  wrote 
to  Roger  A.  Pryor,  an  editor  of  Richmond,  Virginia,  and 
later  fire-eating  member  of  the  national  House  of  Repre 
sentatives  :  "It  is  equally  true  that  I  do  not  expect  Virginia 
to  take  any  initiative  steps  toward  a  dissolution  of  the 
Union,  when  that  exigency  shall  be  forced  upon  the  South. 
Her  position  as  a  Border  state  and  a  well-considered  Southern 
policy  (a  policy  which  has  been  digested  and  understood 
and  approved  by  the  ablest  men  in  Virginia,  as  you  yourself 
must  be  aware),  would  seem  to  demand  that  when  such  a 
movement  takes  place,  by  any  considerable  number  of  the 
Southern  states,  Virginia  and  the  other  Border  states  should 
remain  in  the  Union,  where  by  their  position  and  their 
counsels,  they  could  prove  more  effective  friends  than  by 
moving  out  of  the  Union,  and  thus  giving  the  Southern 
Confederacy  a  long  abolition  hostile  border  to  watch.  In 
the  event  of  the  movement  being  successful,  in  time  Virginia 
and  the  other  states  that  desired  it,  could  join  the  Southern 


178  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Confederacy  and  be  protected  by  the  power  of  its  affirm 
ance  and  its  diplomacy." 

"We  shall  fire  the  Southern  heart,  instruct  the  Southern 
mindj  give  courage  to  each  other,  and  at  the  proper  moment, 
by  one  organized  concerted  action,  we  can  precipitate  the  cotton 
states  into  a  revolution"  These  eloquent,  damning  words 
of  Yancey  would  not  down ;  they  were  never  denied ;  and 
by  the  common  consent  of  the  nation,  they  were  associated 
with  the  Breckenridge  party,  as  its  very  heart  and  soul.1 

A  leading  Bell-Everett  speaker  named  a  list  of  twenty-six 
leading  public  men  in  the  South,  including  members  of  the 
United  States  Senate,  the  United  States  House  of  Repre 
sentatives,  governors  of  states  and  ex-governors,  all  of  them 
Breckenridge  men  and  all  openly  in  favor  of  disunion 
if  Lincoln  were  elected.  In  this  list  were  the  Hon.  Jefferson 
Davis  of  Mississippi,  the  Hon.  L.  M.  Keitt  of  South  Caro 
lina,  the  Hon.  Mr.  Curry  of  Alabama,  the  Hon.  J.  T. 
Morgan  of  Alabama,  the  Hon.  J.  L.  Orr  of  South  Carolina, 
the  Hon.  R.  B.  Rhett  of  South  Carolina,  the  Hon.  William 
L.  Yancey  of  Alabama,  Governor  J.  J.  Pettus  of  Alabama, 
Ex-Governor  McRae  of  Florida,  Governor  Perry  of  Florida, 
Ex-Governor  McWillie  of  Mississippi,  the  Hon.  Reuben 
Davis  of  Mississippi,  the  Hon.  Roger  A.  Pryor  of  Virginia, 
Governor  Gist  of  South  Carolina,  and  the  Hon.  Mr.  Boyce 
of  South  Carolina.2 

These  attacks  on  Breckenridge  by  the  Southern  Unionists 
were  accompanied  by  definitely  formulated  announcements 
of  a  different  policy. 

1  For  the  above  quotations  and  many  others,  see  the  Newbern  Daily 
Progress,  Newbern,  North  Carolina,  August  16,  1860,  and  the  Memphis 
Daily  Appeal,  July  19,  1860.     At  Charleston,  on  the  evening  of  the  seces 
sion  of  the  Alabama  delegation,  addressing  crowds  in  the  street,  Yancey 
said:    "Perhaps  even  now  the  pen  of  the  historian  was  nibbed  to  write 
the  story  of  a  new  revolution,"  at  which  three  cheers  for  a  new  Southern 
Republic  were  proposed  and  given  with  a  will. 

2  See  the  Bell-Everett  attack  of  Brownlow  on  the  secession  of  the 
Breckenridge  party,  pp.  336-340. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  179 

BelPs  adhesion  to  the  Union  was  accompanied  by  an 
appeal  to  moderation  and  compromise,  which  were  "the 
characteristics  of  the  constitution  itself."  His  words  of 
former  days  were  spread  broadcast.  "The  middle  or 
moderate  party,"  he  said  in  Congress  in  1832,  in  discussing 
the  tariff  of  that  year,  "is  never  in  much  esteem  with  the 
extremes  of  either  side,  but  it  has  always  found  its  support 
in  the  good  sense  and  moderation  of  the  great  body  of  the 
people."  In  1835  in  a  speech  in  Nashville  he  said:  "As 
long  as  moderation  and  the  spirit  of  conciliation  shall  preside 
over  the  administration  of  the  Federal  government,  any 
faction  which  shall  seek  to  divide  the  Union,  either  by  rous 
ing  a  sense  of  injustice  and  inequality  in  the  action  of  the 
government  in  one  section,  or  by  seizing  upon  the  delicate 
and  inflammable  question  of  slavery  in  the  other,  can  always 
be  shorn  of  its  strength  and  defeated  of  its  purpose,  without 
the  slightest  convulsive  sensation  in  our  system.  .  .  .  The 
real  danger  to  our  system,  as  in  every  other  system  of  free 
government,  is  in  violent  party  action  of  the  government. 
A  proscribed  and  disregarded  minority,  respectable  for  its 
numbers,  its  talents,  and  even  for  the  virtues  of  many  of 
its  members  —  for  violence  is  never jthe  exclusive  attitude  of 
any  one  party  —  such  a  minority  Us  always  tempted  in  re 
sentment  for  its  real  or  imaginary  wrongs,  in  redress  for  its 
violated  privileges  as  American  citizens,  in  being  deprived 
of  all  participation  in  the  government,  compelled  to  obey 
laws  and  be  the  subjects  of  a  policy  prescribed  and  directed 
exclusively  by  their  opponents,  such  a  minority,  I  repeat,  is 
\ constantly  tempted  to  seize  upon  every  vexed  and  irritating 
question,  to  make  common  cause  with  the  spirit  of  fanat 
icism  itself,  in  an  effort  to  right,  or  at  all  events,  to  avenge, 
their  injuries.  This  is  the  danger  of  our  system.^1 

1  The  National  Intelligencer,  September  20,  1860 ;  here  is  published  a 
campaign  tract  of  the  Bell-Everett  party,  and  the  sentiments,  copied  in 
the  text  above  and  taken  from  this  tract,  represent,  therefore,  the  position 
of  the  party  in  the  crisis  of  1860. 


180  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Sometimes  the  Bell  men  grew  violent  and  forsook  their 
moderation.  Before  an  excited  crowd  in  Knoxville,  Tennes 
see,  where  Yancey  was  defending  his  principles,  W.  G. 
Brownlow  and  four  other  Bell  supporters  asked  the  speaker 
what  he  would  do  if  Lincoln  were  elected,  and  Yancey  re 
sponded  by  another  question :  "Who  are  you  in  favor  of 
for  President?7'  The  Bell  men  admitted  their  allegiance 
and  Brownlow,  as  their  spokesman,  declared:  "When  the 
secessionists  go  to  Washington  to  dethrone  Lincoln,  I  am 
for  seizing  a  bayonet  and  forming  an  army  to  resist  such  an 
attack,  and  they  shall  walk  over  my  dead  body  on  their 
way."  Yancey  replied  that  he  would  not  individually 
secede  but  would  follow  his  state.  "If  my  state  resists,  I 
shall  go  with  her,  and  if  I  meet  this  gentleman  (pointing  to 
Brownlow),  marshalled  with  his  bayonet  to  oppose  us, 
I'll  plunge  my  bayonet  to  the  hilt  through  and  through  his 
heart,  and  feel  no  compunction  for  the  act,  and  thank  my 
God  that  my  country  has  been  freed  from  such  a  foe.  This 
man,  forgetful  of  his  nativity,  has  uttered  fratricidal  senti 
ments  of  hostility  toward  the  men  of  the  South,  who  differ 
from  him  upon  their  view  of  their  rights,  and  the  time  and 
the  manner  in  which  they  should  be  asserted  and  supported, 
but  who,  if  they  err  in  judgment,  err  on  the  side  of  patriotism 
and  through  their  devotion  to  their  native  land."  1 

Douglas'  program  of  unionism,  which  was  much  more 
positive  than  that  of  Bell,  culminated  at  Norfolk,  Virginia, 
where  the  head  of  the  Breckenridge  ticket  handed  Douglas 
a  paper  with  two  questions  on  it.  The  first  question  ran : 
"If  Abraham  Lincoln  be  elected  president  of  the  United 
States,  will  the  Southern  states  be  justified  in  seceding  from 
the  Union?"  "To  this  I  answer  emphatically,  no.  The 
election  of  a  man  to  the  presidency  by  the  American  people, 
in  conformity  to  the  constitution  of  the  United  States, 
would  not  justify  any  attempt  at  dissolving  this  glorious 
1  The  New  York  Times,  September  29,  1860. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  181 

confederation.  Now  I  will  read  to  you  the  second  question 
and  answer  it.  'If  they,  the  Southern  states,  seceded  from 
the  Union  upon  the  inauguration  of  Abraham  Lincoln, 
before  he  commits  an  overt  act  against  their  constitutional 
rights,  will  you  advise  or  vindicate  resistance  by  force  to 
their  secession  ? '  (Voices  of  Bell  men  were  heard  crying  '  No, 
no,  Douglas.7)  I  answer  emphatically  that  it  is  the  duty  of 
the  President  of  the  United  States,  and  all  others  in  authority 
under  him,  to  enforce  the  laws  of  the  United  States  as  passed 
by  Congress  and  as  the  courts  expound  them.  And  I,  as 
in  duty  bound  by  my  oath  of  fidelity  to  the  constitution, 
would  do  all  in  my  power  to  aid  the  government  of  the 
United  States  in  maintaining  the  supremacy  of  the  laws 
against  all  resistance  to  them,  come  from  what  quarter  it 
might.  In  other  words,  I  think  the  President  of  the  United 
States,  whoever  he  may  be,  should  treat  all  attempts  to 
break  up  the  Union,  by  resistance  to  its  laws,  as  Old  Hickory 
treated  the  nullifiers  in  1832.  The  laws  must  be  enforced, 
but  at  the  same  time  be  it  remembered,  it  is  the  duty  of 
every  citizen  of  every  State,  and  every  other  functionary, 
to  preserve,  maintain,  and  vindicate  the  rights  of  every  citi 
zen  and  the  rights  of  every  state  in  the  Union.  I  hold  that 
the  constitution  has  a  remedy  for  every  grievance  that  may 
arise  within  the  limits  of  the  Union."  Yet  he  believed  in 
the  right  of  revolution  against  an  oppressive  government ; 
the  President  of  the  United  States  he  would  "hang  higher 
than  Haman"  if  he  transcended  his  power.  "I  am  for 
putting  down  the  Northern  abolitionists  but  am  also  for 
putting  down  the  Southern  secessionists,  and  that  too  by  an 
exercise  of  the  same  constitutional  power.  I  believe  that 
the  peace,  harmony,  and  safety  of  this  country  depend  upon 
destroying  both  factions.1 

1  The  New  York  Herald,  August  27,  1860.  For  the  answer  at  Raleigh, 
North  Carolina,  to  the  same  questions,  see  pp.  294-296.  For  Yancey's 
answers,  see  pp.  322-328. 


182  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

4) 

These  words  are  of  refreshing  frankness  compared  with 
the  craven  position  of  candidate  Breckenridge  on  the  same 
subject,1  or  the  milk  and  water  utterances  of  candidate  Bell.2 
Yet,  on  the  morality  of  slavery,  Douglas  was  the  one  who 
hedged.3 

At  Baltimore,  Douglas  delivered  the  following  words : 
"Nor  can  they  screen  themselves  under  the  pretext  that 
this  would  be  making  war  on  sovereign  states.  Sovereign 
states  cannot  commit  treason  —  individuals  may.  .  .  . 
When  a  citizen  of  Vermont  arrays  himself  against  the  con 
stitution  and  the  laws  by  resisting  the  marshal  in  the  execu 
tion  of  the  fugitive  slave  law,  we  do  not  allow  the  violator 
to  screen  himself  under  the  sovereignty  of  Vermont,  but  we 
punish  the  violators  of  the  law  wherever  we  find  them.  .  .  . 
Secession  means  revolution.  It  is  only  another  word  for 
the  same  meaning.  I  hold  to  the  inherent  right  of  revolu 
tion,  whenever  the  evils  of  civil  war  and  revolution  are  less 
than  those  of  obedience  to  law.  It  is  upon  that  principle 
only  that  Washington,  Jefferson,  Franklin,  and  Adams  justi 
fied  their  conduct  in  seceding  from  the  British  Empire. 
When  they  seceded  they  did  not  skulk  behind  the  pretended 
sovereignty  of  the  colonies.  They  avowed  that  the  evils 
of  resistance  were  less  than  those  of  submission.  They 
looked  the  gallows  in  the  face,  and  like  brave  men  dared  all 
the  consequences  of  their  acts,  though  the  halter  awaited 
their  necks  had  they  f ailed. "  4 

Douglas  believed  that  his  own  section  of  the  Northwest 
would  never  countenance  secession.  "You  go  into  one  of 
our  new  settlements  in  Kansas,  Nebraska,  Illinois,  or  any 
of  them,  and  there  you  will  find  that  a  North  Carolinian 
has  settled  down  by  the  side  of  a  Connecticut  farmer,  with 
a  Virginian  next  to  him,  a  New  Yorker,  a  South  Carolinian 

1  See  pp.  174^175.  2  See  p.  179.  8  See  p.  184. 

4  The  Newbern  Daily  Progress,  Newbern,  North  Carolina,  September 
14,  1860. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  183 

and  representatives  of  every  state  around  him,  the  whole 
union  being  represented  on  the  prairie  by  the  farmers  who 
have  settled  on  it.  In  the  course  of  time  the  young  folks  in 
the  community  begin  to  visit,  and  in  a  short  time  a  North 
Carolinian  boy  sees  a  Yankee  girl  he  likes,  and  his  prejudices 
against  her.  people  begin  to  soften.  In  a  few  years,  the 
Carolina  and  the  Connecticut  people  are  united,  the  Vir 
ginian  and  the  Pennsylvanian,  the  Yankee  and  the  slave 
holder,  are  united  by  the  ties  of  marriage,  and  friendship 
and  social  intercourse ;  and  when  their  children  grow  up, 
the  child  of  the  same  parents  has  a  grandfather  in  North 
Carolina  and  another  in  Vermont ;  and  that  child  does  not 
like  to  hear  either  of  those  states  abused ;  .  .  .  and  he  will 
never  consent  that  this  union  shall  be  dissolved,  so  that  he 
will  be  compelled  to  obtain  a  passport  and  get  it  visaed  to 
enter  a  foreign  land  to  visit  the  graves  of  his  ancestors.  .  .  . 
Do  you  think  that  a  citizen  of  Illinois  will  ever  consent  to 
pay  duties  at  the  custom  house  when  he  ships  his  corn  down 
the  Mississippi  to  supply  the  people  there?  Never  on 
earth.  We  shall  say  to  the  custom  house  gate-keepers  that 
we  furnish  the  water  that  makes  the  great  river,  and  we  will 
follow  it  throughout  its  whole  course  to  the  ocean,  no  matter 
who  or  what  may  stand  before  us."  1 

The  opportunity  to  take  this  strong  Union  stand,  Douglas 
certainly  welcomed.  Yet  as  is  often  the  case  with  patriots, 
patriotism  now  "paid."  As  early  as  the  Charleston  con 
vention  it  had  been  observed  that  a  certain  amount  of 
secession  sentiment  in  the  South  would  benefit  Douglas  in 
the  North  without  hurting  him  in  the  South.  It  would 
enable  him  to  appeal  to  Union  sentiment  in  every  state 
against  hated  traitors,  and  would  afford  him  a  new  issue  to 
talk  about,  to  him  who  of  all  candidates  needed  it.  His 
"gur-reat  pur-rinciple "  of  popular  sovereignty  was  getting 

1  The  Newbern  Daily  Progress,  Newbern,  North  Carolina,  September  5, 
1860 ;  from  a  speech  by  Douglas  at  Raleigh,  North  Carolina. 


184  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

to  be  an  old  story ;  people  had  heard  enough  of  it ;  and  yet 
he  was  not  fit  to  discuss  before  either  Southern  or  Northern 
audiences  the  subject  of  slavery.  The  very  logic  of  popular 
sovereignty  demanded  that  he  be  neutral  here ;  necessarily 
"I  don't  care  whether  slavery  is  voted  up  or  voted  down" 
became  his  position.  In  the  midst  of  the  greatest  moral 
upheaval  of  his  country's  history,  he  stood  almost  alone  as 
the  only  public  man  who  did  not  and  would  not  commit 
himself  on  the  issue  of  the  right  or  wrong  of  African  slavery. 
If  on  the  stump  he  was  asked  point  blank  as  to  his  slavery 
professions,  he  bluffed  and  abused  his  inquirer  and  never 
answered.  In  a  small  town  in  Ohio  the  previous  year,  when 
an  old  man  asked  him  the  fatal  question,  Douglas  proceeded 
to  descant  on  popular  sovereignty;  "You  are  not  answering 
my  question,  Mr.  Douglas ;  I  know  all  about  that ;  but  what 
is  your  opinion  —  is  slavery  a  moral  or  political  evil?" 
"You  may  thank  me  that  I  do  not  rebuke  you  for  your 
impertinence,"  shouted  Douglas  in  confusion,  while  the 
friendly  and  excited  audience  quickly  completed  the  ques 
tioner's  discomfiture.  Practically  the  same  incident  was 
repeated  the  next  year  at  Bangor,  Maine. 

But  over  and  over  again  Douglas  repeated  his  Union  pro 
fessions,  and  challenged  Breckenridge  to  come  out  and 
answer  in  turn  the  Norfolk  questions  on  secession  and 
coercion.  These  questions  had  already  been  propounded 
and  Douglas'  instantaneous  and  courageous  reply  recorded 
before  Breckenridge  arose  to  deliver  his  Lexington  speech. 
But,  as  all  recognized,  Breckenridge  could  not  display  an 
ardent  attachment  to  the  Union  and  at  the  same  time  head 
his  ticket.  His  position  was  delicate.  "If "he  stood  forth  too 
prominently  for  the  Union,  and  favored  coercion  of  seceding 
states  by  the  Washington  government,  he  would  offend  the 
radical  secessionists  of  the  extreme  South;  on  the  other 
hand,  if  he  openly  embraced  secession,  he  would  injure  his 
cause  in  the  Border  states.  Answer  Douglas,  therefore,  he 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  185 

could  not,  and  to  cover  his  position  he  and  his  party  tried 
to  turn  the  tables  and  to  reveal  secession  among  the  Southern 
Douglasites. 

This  Breckenridge  retaliation  upon  Douglas  met  with 
some  success,  for  many  Southerners,  loyal  to  Douglas  in 
this  campaign  of  1860,  had  uncomfortable  records  in  past 
secession  movements  to  be  brought  to  light.  Said  the 
Douglas  vice  presidential  candidate,  Herschel  V.  Johnson, 
as  the  Governor  of  Georgia  in  1856,  to  the  legislature  of 
the  state:  "I  therefore  recommend  you  to  provide  by  law 
for  the  calling  of  a  state  convention,  in  the  event  of  the 
rejection  of  Kansas " ;  he  then  believed  that  disunion  was  at 
hand  and  he  was  friendly  to  the  movement.  "  The  election  of 
Fremont,"  wrote  Johnson  in  1856,  "must  drive  the  Southern 
states  to  dissolution."  Governor  Robert  C.  Wickliffe  of 
Louisiana,  who  helped  at  Baltimore  to  make  the  Douglas 
platform,  as  the  Governor  of  his  state  had  sent  a  secessionist 
message  to  his  legislature.  Ex-Governor  Winston  of  Ala 
bama,  a  Douglas  elector,  in  1857  wrote  to  his  legislature : 
"We  have  everything  to  gain  and  nothing  to  lose  by  dis 
rupting  every  tie  that  binds  us  to  the  Confederacy."  Pierre 
Soule*,  an  ardent  Douglas  man  of  Louisiana,  was  ardent  for 
secession  in  1850.  J.  P.  Hambleton,  the  editor  of  the 
Atlanta  Confederacy,  strong  for  Douglas,  was  red-hot  for 
secession  and  war.  Alexander  H.  Stephens,  Douglas  elector 
in  Georgia,  in  Congress  said  :  "Whenever  the  government  is 
brought  in  hostile  array  against  me  and  mine,  I  am  for  dis 
union,  openly,  boldly,  fearlessly,  for  revolution.  When 
that  day  comes,  if  ever  it  does,  '  down  with  the  government ' 
will  be  my  motto  and  watchword."  Miles  Taylor  of  Louis 
iana,  the  chairman  of  the  Douglas  national  committee,  in  an 
address  to  the  people  of  the  United  States,  said:  "Thank 
God,  no  disunionists  support  Douglas  and  Johnson,"  but  as  a 
member  of  Congress  he  had  openly  spoken  disunion  senti 
ments.  Breckenridge  papers,  issue  after  issue,  kept  up 


186  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

the  merciless  exposure,  while  they  sanctimoniously  clothed 
themselves  in  the  garments  of  Unionism.  The  charge  was 
even  circulated  that  Douglas  had  invited  Yancey  to  become 
his  running  mate  on  the  ticket  as  candidate  for  the  vice 
presidency.1 

The  Breckenridge  retort  to  Bell  may  almost  be  anticipated, 
for  it  centered  about  the  non-committal  attitude  of  the  Con 
stitutional  Union  Party  on  the  great  questions  of  the  day. 
Bell's  platform,  which  called  merely  for  "the  constitution  of 
the  country,  the  union  of  the  states,  and  the  enforcement  of 
the  laws"  as  the  only  true  political  principles,  was  too  short 
and  indefinite.  Whose  interpretation  of  the  constitution  was 
meant,  that  of  Washington  and  Madison,  of  Calhoun,  Yancey 
and  Taney,  or  of  Douglas  ?  What  laws  would  be  enforced, 
those  of  freedom  or  those  of  slavery  ?  The  conflict  of  opin 
ion  could  not  be  settled  by  ignoring  it.  As  well  advise  the 
tempest  to  be  calm  as  to  attempt  to  mollify  an  aroused  com 
munity  into  abandoning  claims  which  it  believed  to  be  just 
and  essential  to  its  welfare.  No  real  vital  beliefs  on  slavery, 
the  great  question  of  the  day,  could  be  found  in  the  record 
of  either  Bell  or  Everett ;  from  the  very  necessities  of  their 
position  they  were  straddlers.  If  asked  to  specify  his  opin 
ions,  either  with  great  propriety  could  reply  in  words  attrib 
uted  to  Sir  Robert  Peel:  "When  that  question  is  made  to 
me  in  a  proper  time,  in  a  proper  place,  under  proper  qualifica 
tions,  and  with  proper  motives,  I  will  hesitate  long  before  I 
will  refuse  to  take  it  into  consideration."  2 

Could  a  party  whose  leaders  refused  to  commit  them 
selves  definitely  on  slavery,  be  trusted  in  its  professions  of 
Unionism  ?  In  Congress  Bell  had  been  on  every  side  of  the 

1  For  all  of  the  quotations  given  here  and  very  many  more,  see  the 
Western   Kentucky    Yeoman,   September  28,    1860.     While  the  Brecken- 
ridgeites    here    and   there  may  have   questioned  Douglas'  devotion   to 
slavery,  this  attack  on  Douglas  was  not  a  prominent  one. 

2  See  pp.  256-257  for  Carl  Schurz's  treatment  of  Bell. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  187 

slavery  question.  He  identified  himself  with  Slade  and 
John  Quincy  Adams  in  favor  of  the  abolition  petitions  of 
the  thirties  and  the  forties,  opposed  House  rule  21,  which 
forbade  the  reception  by  the  House  of  petitions  to  abolish 
slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  in  the  states  or  in  the 
territories,  and  he  opposed  the  annexation  of  Texas  and  the 
ensuing  Mexican  war;  during  the  debates  on  the  compro 
mise  measures  of  1850  he  turned  and  fought  the  Wilmot 
Proviso  principle  and  praised  slavery;  turning  again,  he 
fought  the  Kansas-Nebraska  measures,  and  finally  ended 
by  being  mentioned  at  the  Republican  convention  at  Chicago 
as  a  suitable  Republican  candidate  for  the  presidency. 

Now  in  his  presidential  campaign,  Bell  allowed  his  South 
ern  supporters  to  praise  slavery  and  to  proclaim  far  and  wide 
extracts  from  his  utterances,  carefully  selected  from  the 
proslavery  portion  of  his  record.  At  the  same  time,  his 
Northern  supporters  in  Massachusetts,  the  home  of  Everett, 
the  vice  presidential  candidate,  stoutly  denied  any  sympathy 
or  connection  with  slavery.  To  this  position  was  the  party 
finally  reduced,  supporting  slavery  in  one  section  and  deny 
ing  that  support  in  the  other.  Gradually  the  antislavery 
record  of  Everett  was  developed,  how  in  the  thirties  he  had 
subscribed  to  the  statement  that  "  slavery  was  a  social, 
political,  and  moral  evil"  and  had  never  retracted;  how  he 
had  approved  the  main  line  of  Charles  Sumner's  speech 
for  which  the  proslavery  Brooks  had  assaulted  the  Senator, 
and  how  finally,  in  his  home  in  Cambridge,  Massachusetts, 
he  sent  his  children  to  the  public  schools,  where  negroes  were 
admitted.  This  revelation  of  the  record  of  Bell  and  Everett 
on  slavery,  and  the  two-faced  nature  of  their  campaign,  was 
relied  upon  to  counteract  and  weaken  their  Union  appeal. 

By  the  Republicans,  secession  was  seldom  made  an  issue ; 
they  ridiculed  the  Southern  braggadocio,  joked  about  it, 
but  almost  never  took  it  up  in  earnest  debate.  This  doubt 
less  proceeded  from  deliberate  purpose,  for  had  the  univer- 


188  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

^p 

sally  recognized  predominant  party,  surely  destined  to  win 
the  election,  opposed  the  Southerners  argument  for  argument 
on  this  point,  then  inevitably  in  self-defense  the  Southerners 
would  have  stiffened  in  their  position,  and  secession  would 
have  been  rendered  still  more  certain.  Such  a  campaign 
by  the  Republicans  would  also  have  served  to  frighten  their 
own  supporters,  many  of  whom  would  consider  long  before 
casting  a  ballot  for  Lincoln  if  persuaded  that  that  ballot 
would  hasten  secession  and  civil  war.  Surely  thousands  of 
Republican  votes  were  cast  without  the  least  expectation 
that  war  would  result.  Up  to  the  election,  a  serious  Repub 
lican  argument  against  disruption  can  scarcely  be  found.  A 
few  hot-heads  in  Congress,  under  provocation,  proclaimed 
that  they  would  coerce  the  disunionists  into  remaining  in 
the  Union ;  a  campaign  speaker  now  and  then  mentioned  the 
subject ;  a  few  said  (to  employ  a  phrase  later  used  by  Horace 
Greeley  in  this  connection),  "Let  the  erring  sisters  go  in 
peace. "  But  that  is  all. 

'  To  Mayor  John  Wentworth  of  Chicago,  as  to  thousands 
of  others,  the  cry  of  secession  was  but  "the  old  game  of 
scaring  and  bullying  the  North  into  submission  to  Southern 
demands  and  Southern  tyranny."  l  "It  reminds  me  of  the 
story  of  the  doctor,"  said  a  Congressman  on  the  floor  of  the 
House  of  Representatives  at  Washington;  "a  quack  doctor 
was  called  to  see  a  man  who  was  attacked  with  some  sort  of 
disease  or  other,  I  do  not  know  what,  and  the  doctor  did  not 
know  either ;  but  he  told  his  patient  that  he  would  give  him 
a  certain  medicine  that  would  throw  him  into  fits,  and  he 
said  that  he  was  'Hell  on  fits.'  So  with  these  Democratic 
politicians  before  a  presidential  election.  They  always  try 
to  give  the  country  some  sort  of  medicine  that  will  throw  it 
into  fits.  They  are  'Hell  on  fits.'  They  are  now  at  work 
trying  to  throw  the  country  into  fits,  and  they  are  succeed 
ing  pretty  well."  Senator  Hale  of  New  Hampshire  told  the 

1  The  New  York  Herald,  August  1,  1860. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  189 

story  of  a  division  in  a  Connecticut  church,  with  one  deacon 
on  one  side  and  one  on  the  other.  The  preacher  preached 
harmony  and  all  were  moved.  Full  of  emotion  Deacon  Jones 
went  to  Deacon  Snow.  "  Deacon  Snow,  we  must  have 
union."  "Good,"  said  Deacon  Snow,  "we  must."  "Well," 
continued  the  former,  "there  is  but  one  way  to  get  it,  Deacon 
Snow."  "Brother,  what  is  it?"  "Well,  you  must  give  in, 
for  I  cannot."  This  was  exactly  the  attitude  of  the  South. 
There  were  irreconcilable  differences  of  opinion  between  the 
two  sections  and  the  South  said,  "You  must  give  in,  for  we 
cannot ;  you  are  used  to  it  and  we  are  not."  1 

Snapping  his  fingers  in  scorn  at  the  slaveholders,  Seward 
shouted,  at  St.  Paul,  Minnesota:  "For  the  first  time  in  the 
history  of  the  Republic  the  slave  power  has  not  even  the 
power  to  terrify  or  alarm  the  freeman,  so  as  to  make  him 
submit,  and  scheme,  and  coincide,  and  compromise.  It 
rails  now  with  a  feeble  voice,  as  it  thundered  in  our  ears  for 
twenty  or  thirty  years  past.  With  a  feeble  and  muttering 
voice  they  cry  out  that  they  will  tear  the  Union  to  pieces. 
(Derisive  laughter.)  Who's  afraid?  (Laughter  and  cries 
of  "no  one.")  They  complain  that  if  we  do  not  surrender 
our  principles,  and  our  system,  and  our  right,  being  a  ma 
jority,  to  rule,  and  if  we  will  not  accept  their  system  and  such 
rules  as  they  will  give  us,  they  will  go  out  of  the  Union. 
Who's  afraid  ?  (Laughter.)  Nobody's  afraid ;  nobody  can 
be  bought."  2 

After  secession  was  an  accomplished  fact,  the  North  took 
up  the  subject  seriously  and  for  the  first  time  debated  its 
constitutional  aspects.3 

1  See  Carl  Schurz's  humorous  treatment  in  New  York  of  practically  the 
same  subject,  pp.  270-271. 

2  The  New  York  Herald,  October  18,  1860. 

3  In  the  South  the  constitutional  aspects  of  secession  were  a  matter  of 
debate  in  the  Bell-Everett  and  Breckenridge  campaign;   but  this  debate 
did  not  become  general  in  the  nation  till  the  Republicans  took  it  up  aftor 
secession  was  an  accomplished  fact. 


190  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

The  aggressions  of  the  slaveholders,  which  have  now 
been  passed  in  review,  seemed  a  never  ending  theme 
in  popular  discussion.  All  were  familiar  with  the  indict 
ment.  The  last  count,  secession,  was  of  the  most  imme 
diate  importance  in  the  campaign,  although  the  others 
were  not  forgotten,  territorial  aggrandizement,  aimed  at 
peaceful  neighboring  nations,  at  the  newly  organized  terri 
tories,  and  at  the  freedom  of  the  Northern  free  states,  insist 
ent  demands  for  a  legalized  foreign  slave  trade,  renuncia 
tion  of  professions  of  freedom  made  in  past  years,  departure 
from  the  previous  practices  of  the  government,  the  new 
attitude  of  the  Supreme  Court,  and  shipwreck  of  the  party 
traditions  of  loyalty  to  "the  fathers." 

But  the  opponents  of  the  slaveholders  were  not  behind 
in  taking  a  new  and  aggressive  position ;  and  the  very  exist 
ence  of  the  Republican  party,  built  up  in  six  short  years  out 
of  the  conscious  desire  of  a  multitude  of  people  to  destroy 
slavery,  is  proof  of  the  charge. 

The  grounds  for  this  incontrovertible  statement  cannot 
be  found  in  the  formal  declarations  of  the  platform  of  the 
Republican  party,  for  that  document  was  piously  worded 
to  disclaim  any  intended  attack  on  state  institutions;  as 
little  may  it  be  found  in  the  cunning  strategy  of  the  majority 
of  campaign  orators,  for  these  planted  themselves  squarely 
on  their  platform  in  concealing  their  real  intentions.  The 
record  of  daily  events  disclosed  Republican  policy.  North 
ern  newspapers  embodied  it,  and  not  the  party  platforms; 
the  spontaneous  words  and  acts  of  individual  men  in  their 
actual  contact  with  slavery,  and  not  the  deceptive  utter 
ances  of  the  politicians.  An  enumeration  of  the  leading 
factors  involved  in  the  popular  discussion  readily  suggests 
itself;  the  John  Brown  raid  and  the  stupendous  wave  of 
enthusiastic  approval  called  forth  in  countless  ways  by  that 
event;  Hinton  Rowan  Helper's  Impending  Crisis  and  the 
ensuing  struggle  over  the  speakership  in  the  House  of  Repre- 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  191 

sentatives ;  the  bitter  debates  of  the  Senate  and  the  House ; 
the  unsparing  presentation  of  the  evils  of  slavery  in  the 
Republican  press;  the  responsive  sympathy  of  Sunday 
Schools  and  Churches  for  blacks  in  distress;  the  moblike 
resistance  to  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law  and  the  rescue  of  fugitive 
slaves;  the  enactment  of  the  personal  liberty  laws  in  the 
various  state  legislatures ;  the  repugnance  of  courts  to  con 
vict  and  punish  the  stealers  and  rescuers  of  the  fugitives; 
the  refusal  of  the  Northern  governors  to  give  up  offenders 
to  the  South  under  writs  of  extradition ;  the  popular  terror 
ism  practiced  on  Southerners  traveling  quietly  in  the  North 
with  their  slaves ;  the  outcome  of  the  Lemmon  case  in  the 
courts  of  New  York ;  the  prominence  in  the  Northern  press 
of  the  alleged  kidnapping  cases  in  the  Border  states;  the 
burning  indignation  at  the  foreign  slave  trade,  at  the  govern 
ment's  lukewarm  attitude  in  regard  to  the  suppression  of 
the  trade,  and  at  the  demand  in  the  South  for  its  reopen 
ing;  the  sympathy  for  the  free  negroes;  the  fierce  denun 
ciation  of  slavery  by  religious  bodies  and  by  the  religious 
press ;  the  division  and  strife  in  the  great  national  charitable 
societies.  These  things  all  had  but  one  meaning,  and  that 
was  that  the  Northern  people  were  mightily  opposed  to 
slavery  and  stood  ready  to  strike  it  mortal  blows.  This 
was  the  inexorable  logic  of  daily  events,1  and  it  was  the 
genuine  Republican  doctrine.  None  could  deny  it. 

That  this  interpretation  is  fair  and  true,  the  testimony  of 
many  bold  spirits  goes  to  prove.  John  Wentworth,  Mayor 
of  Chicago  and  editor  of  the  Chicago  Democrat,  wrote : 
"A  scheme  may  be  devised  and  carried  out  which  will  result 
in  the  peaceful,  honorable,  and  equitable  emancipation  of  all 
the  slaves,  .  .  .  the  states  must  be  made  free  .  .  .  the  work 
will  be  one  of  time  and  patience,  but  it  must  be  done.77 
William  H.  Seward,  when  asked  how  long  the  "  irrepressible 

1  See  Chap.  IV. 

»  The  New  York  Herald,  August  1,  1860. 


192  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

conflict"  would  last,  replied:  "So  long  as  the  wrong  exists, 
and  right  and  reason  are  left  free  to  combat  it.  I  hold 
that  slavery  is  wrong,  and  myself  and  those  who  think  with 
me,  are  in  a  conflict  with  those  who  think  slavery  right. 
There  are  but  two  sides  to  the  question."  1  In  a  fiery  speech 
in  Lansing,  Michigan,  he  declared :  "I  will  favor,  as  long  as 
I  can,  within  the  limits  of  constitutional  action,  the  decrease 
and  diminution  of  African  slavery  in  all  the  states."  2  At 
St.  Joseph,  Missouri,  speaking  of  freedom,  he  said :  "But  it 
is  going  through ;  it  is  bound  to  go  through.  As  it  has 
already  gone  through  eighteen  of  the  states  of  the  Union,  so  it 
is  bound  to  go  through  all  of  the  other  fifteen.  It  is  bound 
to  go  through  all  of  the  thirty-three  states  of  the  Union,  for 
the  simple  reason  that  it  is  going  through  all  the  world."  3 
In  his  own  way,  Horace  Greeley  was  as  representative  a 
Republican  as  William  H.  Seward.  Rewrote:  "Believing 
slavery  to  be  a  flagrant  violation  of  the  inalienable  rights  of 
man,  a  burning  reproach  to  the  country,  an  enemy  to  pros 
perity  and  progress  in  art,  intelligence,  and  civilization,  I 
mean  to  labor  for  its  eradication  from  my  own  and  all  other 
countries,  so  long  as  I  live.  But  recognizing  the  right  of 
each  state  to  regulate  its  own  domestic  concerns,  I  stand 
ready  to  forego  and  desist  from  all  political  action  respecting 
slavery  from  the  moment  the  slave  states  disclaim  all  inten 
tion,  forego  all  efforts,  to  extend  their  peculiar  institution 
beyond  their  own  limits^  Thenceforward  I  will  oppose 
slavery  in  Virginia  or  elsewhere  exactly  as  I  oppose  intem 
perance  or  gambling  there  —  not  otherwise."  4  Again  he 
wrote:  "We  pray  God  in  his  own  good  time,  to  make  an 
end  of  it  everywhere,  and  would  gladly,  gratefully,  have  the 
time  come  in  our  day.  .  .  .  We  all  rejoice  at  every  evidence 

1  The  New  York  Herald,  August  27,  1860. 

2  The  New  York  Herald,  September  8,  1860. 

3  The  New  York  Tribune,  October  1,  1860. 

4  The  New  Haven  Daily  Palladium,  October  24,  1860. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  193 

from  time  to  time  afforded  that  the  fabric  of  human  bondage 
totters  to  its  fall.  But  if  you  ask  us  to  undertake  the  over 
throw  of  slavery  in  the  states,  we  will  answer  you,  we  will 
each  do  whatever  is  within  his  power  to  put  a  speedy  end 
to  slavery;  but  we  citizens  of  New  York  or  New  England 
have  no  power  over  the  laws  of  Virginia  or  Alabama.  We  will 
do  our  best,  whenever  opportunity  shall  be  afforded  us,  to 
convince  the  citizens  of  these  states  that  they  ought  to 
abolish  slavery  within  their  respective  states."  1 

The  New  Haven  Daily  Palladium  believed  and  hoped  that 
"a  speedy  abandonment  of  slavery  as  an  industrial  institu 
tion  would  come  in  good  time."  The  radical  program  of 
Sumner's  " Barbarism  of  Slavery"  was  spread  before  thou 
sands  as  a  Republican  campaign  document,  while  Sumner 
himself,  Hale,  Burlingame,  Giddings,  Lovejoy,  and  C. 
M.  Clay  were  spreading  the  same  teachings.  One  of  the 
party's  most  popular  campaign  speakers,  Carl  Schurz,  a 
young  German  emigrant  of  thirty-one  years  of  age  and  him 
self  a  member  of  the  Republican  national  committee,  stood 
forth  boldly  in  the  slave  city  of  St.  Louis  and  in  a  great 
speech  manfully  pleaded  with  the  slaveholders  to  give  up 
their  slaves  and  join  the  ranks  of  antislavery ;  the  animus 
of  the  party  behind  the  speech  cannot  be  doubted.2  The 
standard  bearer  of  the  party,  Abraham  Lincoln,  "  always 
hated  slavery  as  much  as  any  abolitionist,"  and  through  the 
medium  of  his  famous  senatorial  convention  speech,  which 
was  in  wide  circulation  as  a  campaign  document,  he  was  day 
after  day  declaring  to  multitudes  that  the  contest  between 
slavery  and  freedom  would  go  on  till  the  nation  was  entirely 
free  or  entirely  slave ;  and  he  believed  that  freedom  would 
win.  v 

VThe  Democratic_jnterpretation  of  the  Republican  posi- 

1  The  New  York  Independent,  September  27,  1860. 

2  The  members  of  the  national  committee  read  and  approved  of  this 
speech  before  it  was  delivered.     See  Appendix  for  the  speech  in  full. 


194  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


[/ti 
/-c 


tion  is  not  without  weight  in  this  connection.  The  Demo- 
crats  persistently  "saw  the  nigger  peeping  through  the  fenc^ 
Witness  their  ^rnpaign.J^ajQ^paren^es^nd._raottoes.  Fn  a 
great  procession  of  fusionists  in  New  York  City  one  trans 
parency  pictured  a  farm  scene.  H.  G.  was  in  front  and  a 
negro  and  Abe  were  sitting  on  rails.  H.  G.,  shabbily 
dressed,  as  was  his  wont,  and  with  the  Tribune  in  hand, 
ys  :  "Vote  our  ticket  —  we  are  not  abolitionists  until  Old 
be  is  elected."  A  cunning  Yankee  eyes  him  and  replies  : 
I  see  the  nigger  peeping  through  the  fence.  "XA  second 
scene  represented  a  corner  of  fence  rails.  Abe  was  astride 
the  rails  and  beneath  him  in  a  lurking  attitude  was  a  greasy, 
wooly  negro;  H.  G.  was  in  front,  with  pants  stuck  in  his 
boots  and  Tribune  in  his  pocket  ;  he  waved  away  the  atten 
tion  of  a  good-looking  man  who  pointed  with  his  cane  to 
the  nigger  and  chuckled  :  "I  see  the  nigger  peeping  through 
the  fence."  Round  about  were  the  words  :  "Lincoln  on  the 
fence,  the  nigger  on  the  fence,  the  nigger  under  the  fence,  the 
on  the  wood  pile. 


1  Others  of  these  transparencies  were  as  follows  :  First,  there  was  a 
truck  covered  with  flags  and  devices  and  drawn  by  gayly  caparisoned 
horses.  "Weighed  in  the  balance"  said  the  inscription.  Old  Abe  was 
on  the  center  of  a  beam,  suspended  by  a  pivot.  On  one  end  was  a  very 
fat  negress,  and  on  the  other  was  H.  G.,  falling  from  his  position.  Over 
the  negress  was  the  scroll,  "Guess  I'se  the  heaviest,  Massa."  The  bat 
tered  hat  of  the  philosopher  was  on  the  ground,  marked  Tribune.  Second, 
a  small  truck  was  drawn  by  a  jackass  and  occupied  by  two  people,  one 
representing  the  well-known  editor,  dressed  in  white  hat  and  drab  coat,  the 
other  a  negress;  the  man  was  paying  loving  attention  to  the  negress. 
The  whole  was  labelled,  "The  effect  of  the  irrepressible  conflict."  Third, 
there  was  a  boat  at  the  head  of  which  was  Abe  with  the  flag  "Discord," 
and  H.  G.  at  the  stern  holding  the  tiller  and  the  Tribune.  Between  the 
two  sat  the  amalgamationists,  a  thick-lipped  negro  embracing  a  white  girl  ; 
a  fellow  darkey  exclaims,  "I'se  looking  at  you,  Sambo,"  and  Sambo 
chuckles,  "Yah,  yah."  The  boat  is  labelled  "Steamer  A  be  Lincoln,  Cap 
tain  Greeley,  for  the  Mormon  settlement,  November  7,  1860."  The 
prow  of  the  boat  touches  the  land  and  is  met  by  Jonathan  who  says, 
"Look  here,  Old  Abe,  you  can't  land  that  crowd  here,"  and  Abe  replies, 
"Why  Jonathan,  these  are  my  principles,"  and  H.  G.  says  "Colored 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  195 

This  testimony  of  the  Democracy  and  of  the  leaders  of 
the  Republican  party  accords  well  with  the  evidence  of  daily 
events  in  revealing  Republican  aggression.  The  party 
hoped  to  destroy  slavery,  and  this  was  something  new  in  a 
large  political  organization. 

While  both  Republican  and  Democratic  aggression  were 
powerful  and,  for  the  most  part,  sectional  movements,  seces 
sion,  on  the  one  hand,  sprang  from  the  carefully  thought-out 
plans  and  programs  of  definite  leaders,  whereas  antislavery 
arose,  without  leadership,  from  the  spirit  of  an  unnumbered 
multitude  of  common  people.  Each  denied  its  own  aggres 
sion,  and  each  affirmed  that  of  the  other.  The  slaveholders 
pointed  out  that  their  measures  were  the  logical  outcome  of 
the  constitutional  principles  held  by  Yancey  and  other 
leaders  in  1848  and  even  earlier,  and  that  those  were  the 
real  aggressors  who  in  more  recent  years  adopted  anti- 
slavery  as  their  political  principle.  Republicans  appealed 
to  the  changes  in  the  Democratic  party  practices  and  prin 
ciples  to  fasten  the  blame  on  that  party  and  affirmed  that  the 
true  act  of  aggression  was  the  rapid  conversion  of  an  entire 
party  to  the  proslavery  principles  originally  held  by  only  a 
handful.  Removed  from  the  heat  of  the  conflict,  the  pres 
ent  generation  regards  the  rival  contentions  with  impar 
tiality  and  as  its  just  verdict  must  declare  that  each  party 
was  acting  upon  principles  developed  practically  simul 
taneously,  that  each  was  guilty  of  aggression  and  that  each, 
from  its  own  point  of  view,  was  justified  in  its  aggression. 
Assuredly  the  secessionists  were  justified  in  their  step. 
They  believed  that  slavery  was  right  —  it  does  not  matter 
for  the  moment  how  they  arrived  at  this  conclusion ;  with 
this  assumption  in  their  minds,  no  other  course  than  seces 
sion  from  the  Union  for  the  protection  of  their  vast  property 

folks  have  preference  of  staterooms" ;  one  of  the  party  says  "Free  love 
and  free  niggers  will  certainly  elect  Old  Abe  if  he  pilots  us  safe."  See  the 
Liberator,  November  2,  1860. 


196  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

was  possible.  In  the  Union,  then  or  very  soon  thereafter, 
with  the  triumph  of  the  antislavery  Republicans  bent  on 
universal  freedom,  their  millions  and  billions  invested  in 
slaves  were  sure  to  be  swept  away.  To  remain  in  the 
Union  and  suffer  that  fate  would  have  been  weak  and  repre 
hensible  in  the  extreme.  The  only  possible  chance  for  safety 
lay  in  getting  away  from  their  Republican  brethren  into 
a  government  of  then-  own.  The  Republicans,  too,  were 
justified  in  their  course.  As  antislavery,  freedom-loving 
men,  they  were  appealed  to  in  their  moral  natures,  and  were 
swept  along  by  a  great  and  irresistible  wave  of  moral  sym 
pathy.  Thus  the  infinite  pathos  of  the  ensuing  civil  war. 
Both  sides  were  right !  Neither  could  have  given  in  and 
have  remained  true  to  itself.  The  North  was  right  in  oppos 
ing  slavery,  the  South  was  right  in  seceding  from  the  Union 
in  its  defense.  That  the  rest  of  the  world  in  1860  outside 
the  Southern  states  believed,  and  all  the  world  now  believes, 
slavery  a  moral  wrong,  does  not  alter  the  fact  that  in  1860 
the  South  deemed  it  a  moral  right. 

A  topic  of  interest  to  contemporaries,  because  of  supposed 
partisan  advantage,  concerned  the  existence  or  the  non- 
existence  of  a  concerted  conspiracy  on  the  part  of  the  slave 
holders  to  break  up  the  party  conventions  of  the  year  in 
order  later  to  break  up  the  Union.  If  it  could  be  shown 
that  the  slaveholders  went  into  the  Charleston  convention 
for  the  express  purpose  of  breaking  it  up  and  rendering  the 
election  of  Lincoln  more  certain,  as  well  also  as  to  afford  to 
themselves  a  pretext  for  secession,  then  the  movement  and 
its  sponsors,  at  the  moment,  would  be  discredited.  For  the 
men  of  that  day  loved  their  party,  especially  the  Democrats 
who  had  been  triumphant  in  so  many  contests.  To  these 
men  treason  to  their  party  was  most  base;  few  crimes 
worse.  Accordingly  the  Douglasites  spared  no  opportunity 
to  confront  the  slaveholders  with  conspiracy  charges  and 
to  rake  up  all  the  related  facts  possible.1 

i  See  pp.  176-178. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  197 

William  L.  Yancey  loomed  up  as  the  arch  conspirator, 
and  his  words,  already  quoted,1  seconded  by  the  equally 
determined  words  of  scores  of  lesser  lights,  would  seem 
amply  to  prove  the  plot  against  the  Union,  as  charged  by 
Douglas,  Bell,  and  many  others.  But  the  evidence  does 
not  show  that  these  men  went  into  the  Charleston  con 
vention  to  wreck  that  body  and  the  Democratic  party, 
in  order  to  ride  over  the  ruins  into  the  dissolution  of 
the  Union,  although  the  opposition  constantly  made  this 
charge;  with  present  knowledge  this  can  never  be  proved. 
It  cannot  be  affirmed  at  what  moment  the  self-confessed 
disunionists  decided  when  was  the  time  to  strike,  —  before 
the  Charleston  convention,  during  that  convention,  or  after 
it.  Nor  is  this  knowledge  exceedingly  important,  for  if 
the  Southern  statesmen  were  far-sighted  enough  to  realize 
that  a  rupture  of  the  Charleston  convention  would  aid  them 
in  achieving  secession  from  the  Union,  they  are'to  be  com 
mended  for  their  foresight.  Certainly,  by  the  time  of  that 
convention  the  intentions  of  the  Republicans  as  to  slavery 
and  the  probability  of  Republican  success  in  the  coming 
presidential  election,  which  would  furnish  the  justification 
of  secession,  were  plain  to  all  the  world.  All  is  fan-  in  love 
and  war,  and  most  of  all  in  politics.  If  tlife"  rupture  of  the 
convention  was  the  simplest  step  toward  accomplishing  the 
disunion  determined  upon,  Yancey  and  his  followers  are  not 
to  be  condemned.2 

Subsidiary  topics  found  a  place  in  the  Republican  pro 
gram;  in  the  campaigns  of  the  other  parties,  though  not 
altogether  in  their  platforms,  they  were  completely  disre 
garded.  These  were  the  tariff,  internal  improvements,  the 
Pacific  railroad,  the  Pacific  telegraph,  and  the  homestead 
act.  In  the  House  of  Representatives  at  Washington,  scores 

1  See  pp.  176-178. 

2  On  pp.  115-116  the  opinion  is  expressed  that  Yancey  did  not  disrupt  the 
Charleston  convention  for  the  ultimate  purpose  of  disrupting  the  Union. 


198  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

of  speeches  were  made  in  favor  of  a  protective  tariff,  par 
ticularly  by  members  from  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey, 
and  a  tariff  bill  was  passed  in  that  body,  but  was  imme 
diately  smothered  in  the  Democratic  Senate ;  the  Republican 
convention  at  Chicago  strongly  indorsed  the  policy ; 1  and 
in  the  campaign  minor  references  to  it  were  made  in  public 
speech.  But  beyond  this  the  economic  doctrine  of  protec 
tion  to  industries  received  little  recognition.  Both  branches 
of  the  Democracy  were  in  opposition.  Even  here,  however, 
candidate  Douglas  did  not  miss  a  chance  to  twist.  He  who 
in  1855  had  said:  "I  am  a  free  trade  man  to  the  fullest 
extent  we  can  carry  it,  and  at  the  same  time  collect  revenue 
enough  to  defray  the  expenses  of  the  government.  In 
other  words  I  am  for  no  other  kind  of  a  tariff  than  a  revenue 
tariff,"  as  a  candidate  for  the  presidency  in  1860,  while 
speaking  in  Pennsylvania,  praised  the  protective  policy.  It 
was  the  Keystone  state  and  New  Jersey  with  large  iron 
interests,  that  were  mainly  responsible  for  the  prominence  of 
the  question. 

The  doctrine  of  internal  improvements  by  the  general 
government  was  brought  to  the  front  by  the  strong  message 
of  President  Buchanan  vetoing  an  act  to  appropriate  $55,000 
from  the  national  treasury  to  improve  St.  Clair  Flats  in 
Michigan  between  Lakes  Huron  and  Erie,  and  by  the  oppos 
ing  platform  declaration  of  the  Republicans  in  favor  of  such 
improvements.  The  word  " regulate"  in  the  constitutional 
clause  giving  Congress  power  "to  regulate  commerce  with 
foreign  nations,  and  among  the  several  states  and  with  the 
Indian  tribes,"  said  the  President,  who  adhered  to  strict 
construction  of  the  constitution,  did  not  mean  to  create  but 
rather  to  rule  that  which  was  already  created.  "What  a 
vast  field  would  the  exercise  of  this  power  open  for  jobbing 
and  corruption.  .  .  .  Members  of  Congress,  from  an 

1  As  the  platform  was  read  to  the  convention,  more  applause  was  given 
to  the  tariff  plank  than  to  any  other. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  199 

honest  desire  to  promote  the  interests  of  their  constituents, 
would  struggle  for  improvements  within  their  districts,  and 
the  body  itself  (Congress)  must  necessarily  be  converted 
into  an  arena,  where  each  would  endeavor  to  obtain  from 
the  treasury  as  much  money  as  possible  for  his  own  locality. 
The  temptation  would  prove  irresistible.  A  system  of  log 
rolling  (I  know  of  no  word  so  expressive)  would  be  inaugu 
rated,  under  which  the  treasury  would  be  exhausted,  and 
the  Federal  government  be  deprived  of  the  means  necessary 
to  execute  those  great  powers  clearly  confided  to  it  by  the 
constitution  for  the  purpose  of  promoting  the  interests  and 
vindicating  the  honor  of  the  country."  Let  Michigan 
herself,  with  the  consent  of  Congress,  provide  for  the  de 
sired  improvement  by  levying  tonnage  duties  on  passing 
commerce;  that  great  state  should  " cease  to  depend  on  the 
treasury  of  the  United  States."  He  admitted  that  the  gov 
ernment  concerned  itself  with  such  improvements  as  light 
houses,  buoys,  beacons  and  public  piers,  but  this  was  only 
after  a  secession  of  land  for  the  purpose  had  been  obtained 
from  the  states.1 

In  spite  of  this  admirable  message,  which  revealed  the 
President  at  his  best,  strong  public  sentiment  was  crystal 
lizing  in  favor  of  the  opposite  view  of  the  powers  of  the  gov 
ernment,  and  with  this  the  Republicans  identified  them 
selves.  Surely  the  historian  must  record  that  Buchanan 
as  a  prophet  has  been  vindicated. 

In  the  minds  of  the  people,  of  all  the  various  public  im 
provements  then  proposed,  a  railroad  to  the  Pacific  seemed 
the  most  desirable ;  party  conventions,  Democratic  (of  both 
factions)  and  Republican  alike,  united  in  the  demand.  The 
West  was  calling  for  the  undertaking  in  the  belief  that  it 
would  aid  them  in  the  conquest  of  the  country  and  in  the 
general  spread  of  population;  the  East  was  moved  by 
considerations  of  commercial  gain.  Horace  Greeley,  in  an 

1  U.  S.  Senate  Executive  Documents,  36  Cong.,  1  Sess.,  No.  6. 


200 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


almost  forgotten  book,1  summed  up  the  arguments.  The 
arrivals  and  departures  by  sea  at  the  port  of  San  Francisco 
told  their  own  story.  Many  more  traveled  westward 

SAN  FRANCISCO 


ARRIVALS 

DEPARTURES 

1849  

91,415 

1850  ....  

36,462 

1851  

27,182 

22,946 

1852      

66,988 

22,946 

1853  

33,232 

30,001 

1854      

47,531 

23,508 

1855  

29,198 

22,898 

1856  

28,119 

22,747 

1857        

22,990 

16,902 

overland,  60,000  in  1854,  12,000  in  1857,  and  30,000  in  1859 ; 
some  traversed  the  plains  eastward.  In  all,  50,000  people 
were  annually  crossing  the  continent  one  way  or  the  other, 
and  nine-tenths  of  these  would  travel  by  the  cheaper  and 
quicker  railroad,  if  only  the  opportunity  were  afforded. 
Moreover,  with  the  railroad  two  and  three  times  as  many 
would  set  out  as  did  actually  set  out  without  it ;  if  the  rail 
road  had  existed  in  1850,  two  million  Anglo-Saxons  would  at 
that  very  time  be  on  the  Pacific  coast.  The  author  con 
sidered  the  output  of  gold  which  averaged  fifty  million  dollars 
per  year  for  the  previous  ten  years,  or  five  hundred  million 
in  all.  In  return  for  all  this  outflow  of  treasure,  millions  of 
dollars  worth  of  silks,  jewelry,  spices,  drugs,  etc.,  were  coming 
to  the  coast  in  traffic  that  always  sought  the  quickest  route. 
Some  of  the  government  mail  subsidy  of  a  million  and  a  half 
dollars  for  service  over  the  Isthmian  route  could  be  secured 
for  the  new  road,  as  well  as  the  six  million  per  year  then 
expended  for  transportation  of  soldiers  and  munitions  of  war 

1  An  Overland  Journey  from  New  York  to  San  Francisco  in  the  Summer 
of  1859,  by  Horace  Greeley,  New  York  and  San  Francisco,  1860. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  201 

westward;  Mormon  patronage  also  could  be  counted  upon. 
Along  the  route,  population  and  trade  would  be  stimulated. 
Greeley  thought  that  in  all  a  trade  of  $17,000,000  per  year 
could  be  diverted  to  the  road,  a  sum  that  would  be  vastly 
increased  by  the  new  trade  sure  to  be  opened  in  the  Pacific 
with  Asiatic  countries.  The  road  would  increase  the  effi 
ciency  of  the  army,  render  the  mails  more  sure  and  frequent, 
and  advance  the  cause  of  education  in  general.1  Despite 
all  the  well-known  practical  difficulties  of  construction,  a 
railroad  to  the  Pacific  was  indispensable ;  it  would  be  worth 
more  to  the  country  than  a  dozen  Cubas. 

Even  President  Buchanan  went  beyond  the  bounds  of 
strict  construction  of  the  constitution  in  favor  of  the  enter 
prise,  and  declared  that  it  might  well  be  looked  upon  as  an 
aid  in  guarding  the  Pacific  coast  from  foreign  enemies  and 
as  such  could  be  undertaken  by  the  national  government 
under  the  war  power  of  Congress.  Many  Southerners 
also,  for  the  moment,  cast  aside  strict  construction  ideas, 
although  it  was  generally  for  a  Southern  Pacific  for  which 
they  gave  their  voice ;  they  could  never  be  brought  to  assist 
the  Republicans  in  favor  of  the  Northern  route. 

The  same  interests  sought  a  telegraph  to  the  Pacific,  and 
in  the  two  houses  of  Congress  there  was  the  same  sectional 
clash  of  opposing  sides,  the  same  inability  to  agree  on 
details.2 

The  strongest  of  the  minor  issues  advanced  by  the  Repub 
licans  embraced  the  subject  of  a  homestead  act,  by  which  it 
was  sought  to  attract  settlers  to  the  West  through  cheap 
public  lands.  As  a  result  of  the  panic  in  1857  and  the  re- 

1  One  argument,  later  of  importance,  does  not  seem  now  to  have  been 
prominent ;    such  a  connectipn  with  the  Pacific  regions  would  tend  to 
prevent  the  possible  secession  of  those  regions  from  the  Union. 

2  A  typical  Western  paper,  the  Topeka  Tribune,  ridiculed  this  project ; 
the  Indians  would  cut  down  the  wires,  the  prairie  fires  would  burn  the 
poles,  and  to  guard  the  line  from  these  evils  would  require  the  services  of 
thousands  of  men. 


202  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

suiting  hard  times  there  was  hardly  any  other  topic  in  the 
whole  West  worthy  of  political  discussion;  a  homestead 
policy  was  stronger  than  any  party.1  Men  in  their  ruin 
were  seeking  the  aid  of  the  government.  The  Nebraska 
legislature  passed  an  act  relieving  the  settler's  homestead 
and  twenty  acres  of  land  for  a  certain  period  from  all  attach 
ment,  levy,  or  sale,  provided  the  settler  himself  lived  on  the 
land.  "Come  to  Nebraska,"  said  the  Nebraska  City  News, 
"snap  your  fingers  in  the  face  of  your  creditors;  strike  out 
a  bold  path  for  the  West  and  for  Nebraska;  here  be  men 
again,  and  secure  for  yourselves  farms,  homes,  and  a  liberal 
competency  for  life,  then  like  honest  and  honorable  men  pay 
off  all  just  and  honorable  demands  upon  you,  here  and  else 
where."  2 

While  the  whole  West,  irrespective  of  party,  Democrats 
and  Republicans,  Douglas  men  and  Lincoln  men,  called  for 
the  proposed  national  bounty,  the  Republicans  seemed  to 
make  the  more  consistent  appeal  to  propitiate  the  sentiment. 
Aside  from  the  opposition  in  the  Senate  of  the  vice  presi 
dential  candidate,  the  party  was  practically  united  for  the 
measure;  Republican  votes,  in  previous  years,  had  stood 
by  it  in  time  of  defeat ;  Republican  senators  and  representa 
tives  arranged  the  details  of  the  Homestead  Act  of  1860, 
which  the  Democratic  President  vetoed.  The  Democratic 
record  was  much  less  welcome.  Douglas,  as  a  western  man, 
had  always  worked  for  free  homesteads,  but  three  times  in 
eight  years  Democratic  votes  had  defeated  the  bill  in  the 
Senate,  and  crowning  all  was  the  veto  message  of  the  Demo 
cratic  President.  Only  personally,  therefore,  and  not  on  the 
record  of  his  party,  could  Douglas  meet  the  Republican 
appeal  to  the  western  voters. 

1  This  was  the  opinion  of  Horace  Greeley,  expressed  in  a  letter,  dated 
Davenport,  Iowa,  early  in  1860.    See  the  Democrat  and  News,  Davenport, 
Iowa,  September  27,  1860. 

2  The  Nebraska  City  News,  Nebraska  City,  Nebraska,  January  21,  1860. 


CAMPAIGN  ARGUMENTS  203 

A  special  argument  for  free  homesteads,  in  addition  to  the 
economic  considerations  usually  urged,  was  the  antislavery 
contention  of  the  Republicans,  who  favored  filling  the  West 
with  hard-working,  independent,  free  soil  settlers,  to  win 
the  section  for  freedom.  Small  independent  owners  would 
people  the  country  faster  than  would  large  slaveholders; 
posted  in  all  the  West,  they  would  hem  in  slavery  in  the 
Southern  states,  surround  it  "by  a  cordon  of  fire/7  and  con 
tribute  to  the  final  destruction  of  the  system  by  rendering 
its  expansion  impossible.  Nor  were  the  Southerners  un 
conscious  of  the  force  of  this  reasoning,  for  defense  of 
slavery  led  them  to  oppose  the  homestead  policy  from  the 
very  beginning ;  in  their  efforts  they  brought  both  the  Whig 
and  the  Democratic  parties  over  to  then*  side,  and  not  till 
the  new  Republican  party  was  born  on  the  antislavery  issue 
did  free  homesteads  secure  adequate  political  recognition. 

Buchanan's  veto  message  represented  the  opposition.  By 
strict  construction  of  the  constitution  it  was  impossible  for 
Congress  to  give  public  lands  away  to  individuals;  "to  dis 
pose  of"  did  not  mean  "to  give  away"  — such  a  degree 
of  control  over  the  territories  Congress  did  not  possess. 
To  those  who  paid  one  dollar  and  twenty-five  cents  for  their 
western  lands,  had  then  settled  them  and  constructed  roads, 
established  schools,  and  laid  foundations  of  prosperous 
communities,  it  would  be  unfair  to  allow  others  to  come  in 
and  settle  by  their  side  on  very  cheap  or  free  lands ;  to  the 
old  soldiers  of  former  wars,  who  had  been  paid  in  part  for 
their  services  by  warrants  on  the  public  lands,  the  measure 
would  be  unfair,  for  the  value  of  their  warrants  would  de 
crease,  if  others  were  allowed  to  acquire  equally  good  lands 
at  a  cheaper  rate;  the  measure  would  be  unfair  in  its  dis 
crimination  in  favor  of  agriculturists  as  against  artisans  and 
laborers,  and  unfair  to  the  old  states  as  compared  with  the 
new ;  and  finally,  as  an  inducement  to  secret  and  lawful 
agreements  in  taking  up  land,  the  act  would  really  lead  to  an 


204  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAJGN 

increase  of  speculation  rather  than  to  the  destruction  of 
speculation,  as  was  claimed  by  its  supporters.  Public 
speculation  it  would  indeed  kill,  but  the  hidden  agreements 
would  multiply.  Finally,  it  would  diminish  the  government 
revenue.1 

Fortunately  for  the  country  this  view  of  James  Buchanan 
on  free  homesteads  was  soon  to  be  overthrown. 

Although  these  less  important  issues  were  entirely  subor 
dinate  to  the  great  slavery  issue,  they  still  represented 
distinct  needs  in  certain  localities,  as  in  the  West  where  the 
Mississippi  valley  was  in  a  critical  period  of  development. 
After  a  decade  of  rapid  growth,  during  which  the  section 
drew  more  attention  to  itself,  it  was  now  in  a  position  in 
national  politics,  where  Congressional  action  seemed  des 
tined  to  make  or  mar  the  record.  The  prominence  of  the 
West  in  national  life  was  now  assured. 

1  The  Works  of  James  Buchanan,  collected  and  ed.  by  John  Basset 
Moore,  Philadelphia  and  London,  1908-1910,  X,  443. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN 

TNCONTESTABLY  Stephen  A.  Douglas  was  the  great- 
-•-  est  figure  on  the  contemporary  political  stage,  the  true 
giant  of  the  times;  more  attention  was  given  to  him 
by  campaign  speakers  and  newspapers  than  to  any  other 
American.  Forty-seven  years  of  age,  in  the  prime  of  phys 
ical  manhood,  and  of  uncommon  native  powers  of  intellect, 
he  well  represented  the  vigor  of  will  and  the  pushing  rest 
lessness  characteristic  of  Americans.  Short  of  stature, 
with  broad  full  chest,  massive  head  and  face  lined  with  care 
and  thought,  with  severe  expression,  and  with  a  voice  loud 
and  clear,  he  was  a  powerful  campaign  speaker.  His  wit  was 
shrewd,  his  tongue  ready,  while  his  good  nature  extended  even 
to  recklessness.  Although  of  no  general  culture,  he  could 
master  a  subject  quickly ;  he  was  always  able  to  command 
his  knowledge,  and  remarkable  clearness  of  statement  char 
acterized  his  every  utterance.  His  personal  magnetism 
before  an  audience  was  commanding.  But  his  tastes  were 
low  and  his  manner  vulgar,  and  both  in  Washington  and  in 
the  West  his  intimates  were  of  the  bar  room.  He  took  no 
account  of  the  moral  element  in  politics  and  made  no  ap 
peals  to  it.  Few  men  thoroughly  trusted  him,  few,  if  any, 
shed  tears  over  his  defeat.  He  was  a  trickster,  whose  next 
move  no  one  could  predict.  While  Lincoln  was  swept  into 
power  on  the  crest  of  a  mighty  wave  of  moral  sentiment, 
which  he  always  recognized  and  served,  the  morally  deficient 

205 


206  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

m 

Douglas  obstinately  turned  his  face  and  was  over 
whelmed.1 

In  illustration  of  Douglas'  unbridled  ambition  for  the 
presidency,  the  following  story  was  told.  Before  the  Demo 
cratic  convention  of  1856  William  L.  Marcy  gave  "  a  dinner  to 
the  candidates/'  In  good  humor  and  satire,  with  the  charm 
of  social  intercourse  for  which  he  was  famous,  Marcy  took 
up  in  order  the  names  of  his  guests  and  discussed  each  one's 
chances  for  the  nomination.  He  ended  without  mentioning 
Douglas  and  the  latter  broke  in,  "Well,  Governor,  what 
do  you  think  of  my  chances?"  "Beg  pardon,  Mr.  Douglas, 
that  reminds  me  of  a  story.  When  I  was  a  boy  in  my  native 
town  in  Massachusetts,  standing  by  the  roadside  one  day, 
a  horseman  at  full  speed,  his  steed  foaming  at  the  mouth, 
suddenly  drew  up  and  asked  the  distance  to  the  next  town. 
'Ten  miles/  came  the  reply.  'And  how  long  will  it  take  me 
to  get  there  ? '  demanded  the  excited  horseman.  '  Why, 
look  here,  my  good  friend,  if  you  ride  any  way  decent,  it  will 
take  just  about  two  hours,  but  if  you  go  like  hell  and  damna 
tion,  you  will  never  get  there."  Whereat  Douglas  got  the 
laugh. 

No  ambitious  man  was  ever  more  censorious,  egotistic,  and 
condescending.  "When  a  man  tells  me  he  will  vote  for 'me 
if  nominated,  wonderful  condescension  indeed!"  he  said  in 
the  Senate;  "vote  for  me  if  nominated !  As  if  such  a  man 
could  for  a  minute  compare  records  with  me  in  labor  for 
the  Democratic  party !"  At  Newark,  New  Jersey,  he  used 
the  following  language:  "I  confess  that  my  ambition/' — 
my  individual  choice  —  would  be  to  retain  my  seat  in  the 

1  At  an  out-of-doors  reception  in  Rhode  Island,  Douglas  stood  with  a  big 
cigar  in  his  mouth,  supporting  himself  with  a  heavy  cane  in  one  hand, 
while  with  the  other  he  shook  the  hands  of  the  people.  At  a  reception  in . 
the  hotel  parlor  in  Norwich,  Connecticut,  in  the  presence  of  refined  and  ele 
gantly  attired  women,  careful  of  the  cleanliness  of  their  gowns  as  these 
swept  the  floor,  he  stood  with  his  cigar  in  his  mouth,  coarsely  spitting  on 
the  floor. 


LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN    /"207 

L^" 

Senate,  in  preference  to  the  presidency,  and  if  elected  I  shall 
deem  that  I  make  a  sacrifice  in  accepting  it  rather  than  you 
by  the  change  of  place.  If,  therefore,  I  consent  to  accept 
your  votes,  I  shall  do  it  on  the  express  condition  that  I 
render  you  quite  as  great  a  favor  by  receiving  them  as  you  do 
by  giving  them.  I  don't  want  the  office  unless  for  your  good 
andjnine,  and  the  good  of  our  children  and  their  posterity/' 

QJis  campaign  tour  of  the  country  was  the  most  sensational 
in  the  history  of  the  country  to  that  time.  /Practically  every 
state,  with  the  exception  of  several  in  the  South,  and  prac 
tically  every  large  city,  outside  of  Charleston,  South  Caro 
lina,  heard  him ;  for  over  two  months  he  spoke  continuously, 
sometimes  delivering  a  score  or  more  of  speeches  in  a  day, 
The  severe  and  dignified  Washington  could  not  be  imagined 
traveling  from  state  to  state,  haranguing  crowd  after  crowd, 
flattering,  cajoling,  joking,  handshaking,  to  win  a  few  votes. 
John  Adams  and  Thomas  Jefferson  were  politicians  who 
coveted  office,  but  neither  could  make  a  speech.  Even 
Henry  Clay,  prince  of  canvassers,  was  silent  when  a  candi 
date,  except  to  write  a  few  letters.  Jackson  and  Harrison 
made  several  speeches  in  their  own  states ;  candidates  Cass 
and  Scott  essayed  speech-making,  but  with  unhappy  re 
sults,  and  Fillmore  and  Buchanan  belittled  themselves  by 
a  few  speeches.  Fremont  in  1856  was  silent.  But  Douglas 
now  spoke  everywhere,  before  all  kinds  of  audiences  and 
without  formal  preparation.  Many  indiscriminate  questions 
on  the  most  important  subjects  he  answered  offhand,  as 
at  Norfolk  on  the  subjects  of  secession  and  coercion.  Often 
he  evaded.  His  bravery  was  ready  for  everythmgj 

Artemus  Ward,  then  a  young  newspaper  man  con 
nected  with  the  Cleveland  Plaindealer,  characterized  Douglas 
as  follows  :  "Mister  editor  :  —  I  seez  my  quil  to  inform  the 
public,  through  the  medeum  of  your  column,  of  the  great 
addishun  I  have  gest  made  2  mi  grate  metropoliticion  sho 
bizness,  and  darin  slak  rope  &  gimnastic  Surkus.  Last 


208  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

nite  I  had  an  intervu  with  Stephen  A.  Duglas,  the  renouned 
politikal  ambidexter  &  proprioter  and  Cheef  Kloun  of  the 
grate  popler  suvrenty  sho.  Mr.  Duglas  is  generally  kald 
the  littil  jiant  from  his  havin  performed  the  grate  feet  of 
wakin  the  hole  length  of  Mason's  and  Dixon's  close  line, 
the  dred  scot  decisshun  in  one  hand  and  his  hole  popler 
suvrenty  sho  in  the  uther;  and  also  for  pulin  up  the  grate 
tree  kald  the  Missourie  Kompromise,  which  was  first  planted 
in  1787  by  Thomas  Gefferson  &  uthers,  and  set  out  again  in 
1820.  Mr.  Duglas  puld  up  this  tre  and  the  constitushun 
with  it  and  plaist  them  under  his  feat. 

"But  I  was  goin  on  to  sa  that  he  haz  bin  travlin  thru  the 
estern  &  suthern  stats  performin  his  triks  and  speekin  his 
pees.  The  way  he  takes  um  in  with  his  popler  suvrenty 
game  is  not  slo.  He  holds  out  a  bil  to  the  peple,  and  sez, 
ther's  popler  suvrenty  —  there's  the  grate  prinsipul.  At 
first  tha  think  tha  see  it ;  but  when  tha  look  a  littil  sharper 
it  vandishes  like  the  du  on  the  oriental  kornstalk  when  the 
noonda  sun  rises  in  the  east  on  a  thunderin  hot  da  in  the 
middle  of  Juli;  it  kant  be  found  nowhere.  The  folks  sum 
times  git  mad  and  korner  him  in  a  tite  plase,  but  he  is  tarnal 
smaul  and  kan  krawl  thru  a  mity  littil  hole.  But  tha  sa  he 
did  wun  grate  trik  at  one  plais  —  he  ate  an  ox  and  20,000 
klams. 

"  As  soon  as  I  herd  of  his  arrival  in  town  I  went  to  pay  him 
a  vizit.  I  found  him  in  the  sho  room  speakin  his  pees.  I 
thawt  I  would  not  be  very  formal,  and  sez  I,  haven't  ye  got 
that  pees  larnt  yit  ?  Sez  he,  yes  —  but  thers  sum  of  the 
doktrin  the  peple  dont  bleeve  and  I  have  toalteritoccashunaly 
to  sute  the  plase.  Says  I,  how  doo  yu  like  the  sho  bizness  ? 
Sez  he,  it  dont  pa.  Says  I,  my  sho  is  dooin  a  stavin  bizness. 
He  groned  and  a  tere  started  in  his  i,  and  says  he,  I  thowt  I 
shood  make  a  good  deal  out  of  mi  popler  suvrenty ;  but,  sez 
he,  it  has  spilt  the  hul  sho ;  the  pepel  begin  to  see  thru  it ; 
and  tha  sa  it  is  a  humbug.  Sez  i,  what  are  yu  gooing  to  doo 


LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN        209 

with  it  ?  Sez  he,  as  soon  as  I  have  yused  up  my  posters  and 
advertisements,  I  shal  thro  it  overborde. 

"Sez  i,  Duglas,  whattle  yu  tak  for  yur  popsovrenty  ?  Sez 
he,  ile  sel  it  cheep.  I  told  him  I  diddent  no  how  too  manig 
his  triks;  but  I  wood  go  into  partnership  with  him  in  the 
sho  biznes.  Sez  he,  its  a  bargin.  I  then  axt  him  what  he 
thawt  of  takin  along  some  darkies  2  sing  songs  and  dans  the 
hornpipe.  Sez  he,  I  wunt  have  ennything  to  do  with  the 
nigger  bizness  agin;  it  dont  pa.  He  sed  he  went  into  the 
nigger  bizness  in  1854  and  had  ben  goin  down  hil  ever  sins ; 
he  said  it  had  nerly  rooined  him.  The  lit  til  jiant  then  per 
formed  on  the  slak  rope  and  chin  the  greest  pole  and  spoke 
his  pees  on  the  top.  One  of  Abe  Lincoln's  rales  was  next 
browt  in,  and  Duglas  was  set  on  and  rode  owt  thru  the  bak 
dors.  Duglas  is  about  5  feet  hi,  and  a  thunderin  grate  man 
for  wun  of  his  size.  I  maid  a  frenological  examinashun  of 
him.  Hee  is  a  man  of  tremendous  power.  His  kaves  are 
huge.  His  bump  of  humbugging  is  as  big  as  a  goos  eg. 
Conseenchusness  is  caved  in.  Hede  make  a  furst  rate  crier 
in  the  sho  bizness ;  his  bump  of  telin  yarns  aint  smawl. 
Duglas  and  I  have  kompleted  our  program  for  our  nu  sho. 
We  call  it  the  nu  yunion  sho,  greest  pole  surkus  together 
with  uther  alarmin  and  darin  feets. 

"  Duglas  wil  perform  the  grand  dubble  and  single  handed 
game  of  popler  suvrenty.  This  game  can  be  seen  best  with 
the  ize  shet.  But  I  must  klose.  We  are  gooing  Westward 
ho  in  a  fu  daze.  Yurs  in  haste,  Artemus  Ward,  Jr.  pee  es. 
Duglas  seze  give  popler  suvrenty  a  good  bio  in  the  paper. "  l 

Abraham  Lincoln,  fifty-one  years  old,  was  an  unknown. 
His  mJnfsyaels,  his  career,  were  followed  in  the  daily  press 
once,  where  those  of  the  Little  Giant  were  mentioned  a  hun 
dred  times.  "Who  is  Abraham  Lincoln?"  queried  the 
Democrats  in  derision,  as  they  recalled  the  earlier  query, 
"Who  is  James  K.  Polk ?"  "We  will  return  James  K.  Polk 

1  The  N&f  Haven  Daily  Palladium,  October  23,  1860. 
p 


210  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

to  the  convention  that  discovered  him,"  came  back  the  an 
swer  with  appropriate  application.  In  the  long  list  of  dark 
horses  from  1840  to  I860,  including  Harrison,  Polk,  and 
Taylor,  none  was  darker  than  Lincoln.  He  was  an  unedu 
cated  man,  a  vulgar  village  politician,  without  experience 
worth  mentioning  in  the  practical  duties  of  statesmanship, 
said  the  Democratic  New  York  Herald;  a  third-rate  western 
lawyer,  continued  the  same  paper,  poorer  even  than  poor 
Pierce,  without  the  ability  to  speak  good  English  grammar, 
hackneyed,  illiterate.1 

After  studying  Lincoln's  picture  in  Harper's  Weekly,  the 
editor  of  the  Charleston  Mercury  wrote  as  follows :  "  A  horrid 
looking  wretch  he  is,  sooty  and  scoundrelly  in  aspect,  a  cross 
between  the  nutmeg  dealer,  the  horse  swapper,  and  the  night 
man,  a  creature  'fit  evidently  for  petty  treason,  small  strate- 
gems  and  all  sorts  of  spoils.'  He  is  a  lank-sided  Yankee  of 
the  uncomeliest  visage,  and  of  the  dirtiest  complexion. 
Faugh !  after  him  what  decent  white  man  would  be  Presi 
dent  ?"  2  "It  is  humiliating,  if  not  disgusting,"  said  the  same 
paper,  "to  see  a  party  in  this  country  putting  forward  a  man 
for  the  presidential  chair,  once  occupied  by  Washington  and 
Jefferson,  whose  only  achievements  have  been  that  he  split 
a  few  hundred  rails  in  his  early  life,  and  at  a  later  period  villi- 
fied  the  armies  of  his  country  while  fighting  her  battles  on 
foreign  soil."  3 

The  Houston  Telegraph,  of  Houston,  Texas,  thus  described 
him:  " Lincoln  is  the  leanest,  lankest,  most  ungainly  mass 
of  legs  and  arms  and  hatchet  face  ever  strung  on  a  single 
frame.  He  has  most  unwarrantably  abused  the  privilege, 
which  all  politicians  have,  of  being  ugly,  and  when  he  unfolds 
his  everlasting  legs  and  arms  and  rises  to  speak,  his  unique 
countenance,  expressive  of  the  most  complete  equanimity, 

1  The  New  York  Herald,  May  19  and  22,  1860. 

2  The  Charleston  Mercury,  June  9,  1860. 

8  The  New  York  Herald,  July  24,  1860,  quoting  the  Charleston  Mercury. 


LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN        211 

the  auditor  will  feel  inclined  to  beat  a  most  precipitate  re 
treat;  but  a  few  moments  dispell  the  illusion  and  he  finds 
himself  listening  eagerly  to  a  most  profound  and  concise 
reasoner,  the  dry  details  of  political  controversy  being  relieved 
by  flashes  of  genuine  wit.  His  forensic  utterances  are  char 
acterized  by  an  earnestness  of  manner,  and  apparent  honesty, 
to  which  he  is  mainly  indebted  for  his  success  in  carrying 
with  him  the  popular  feeling.'7 1 

That  these  criticisms  and  jibes  went  home  to  the  Repub 
licans  is  evidenced  by  the  rapid  appearance  in  the  party  press 
of  scores  of  descriptions  of  the  candidate's  home  life  and  of 
his  manners  and  habits.  His  refraining  from  tobacco  and 
liquors ;  his  refusal  to  entertain  with  whisky  and  insistence 
on  ice  water,  when  at  his  home  the  Republican  committee 
officially  informed  him  of  the  nomination ;  the  plain,  rather 
bare  looking  parlor  in  the  modest  frame  house,  the  customary 
little  table  in  the  center  of  the  room,  and  on  it  the  silver- 
plated  ice  water  pitcher,  Bible,  and  photographs ;  all  these 
things  were  noted.  "  Truth  constrains  us  to  say  that  '  Hon 
est  Abe'  is  not  a  handsome  man ;  but  he  is  not  so  ill-looking 
as  he  has  been  represented.  '  Handsome  is  that  handsome 
does,'  however,  is  a  sensible  adage,"  declared  the  New  York 
Tribune.  The  Worcester  Spy,  Worcester,  Massachusetts,  be 
lieved  that  its  candidate  had  a  "strong,  manly,  cordial, 
winning  look,  which  attracts  every  one,"  2  while  the  Albany 
Evening  Journal  insisted  that  no  one  could  rise  from  a  half 
hour's  conversation  with  Mr.  Lincoln  without  being  agreeably 
impressed  alike  with  his  voice,  manner,  expression,  and  per 
sonal  appearance. 

After  the  nomination  Lincoln  remained  quietly  at  his  home 
in  Springfield,  Illinois,  made  no  important  political  utter 
ances,  and  wrote  no  letters  on  political  topics  that  found 
their  way  into  the  papers.  This  he  did  with  the  approval 

1  The  New  York  Tribune,  June  12,  1860. 

2  The  New  Haven  Daily  Palladium,  June  5,  1860. 


/2i2~~,  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

of  many  of  the  Republican  leaders,  including,  among  others, 
William  Cullen  Bryant.1  In  conversation  with  a  reporter 
of  the  New  York  Herald  he  declared  that  in  response  to  in 
vitation  he  would  like  to  go  into  the  South  and  discuss  political 
issues,  but  that  he  was  dissuaded  from  such  a  course  by  the 
fear  of  ill-treatment.  This  was  a  sad  confession  for  a  presi 
dential  candidate  —  that  there  were  some  states  which  he 
dared  not  enter ;  could  anything  better  indicate  the  sectional 
nature  of  the  Republican  party  ?  queried  the  Herald. 

Douglas,  who  knew  his  adversary  well,  entertained  for  him 
perfect  respect  and  always  referred  to  him  in  the  highest 
terms.  Lincoln's  Mexican  war  record  was  attacked  by  the 
Democrats  with  some  effect,  his  futile  but  famous  "spot 
resolutions "  were  ridiculed,  and  his  vote  that  that  war  was 
"unnecessary  and  unconstitutionally  commenced "  was 
denounced.2 

A  westerner  thus  described  John  C.  Breckenridge :  thirty- 
nine  years  old,  Vice  President  of  the  United  States ;  a  splen 
did  young  fellow  distinguished  as  an  orator  and  as  a  states 
man  ;  of  infinite  tact,  courage,  and  popularity ;  his  good 
fortune  is  a  proverb;  whatever  he  touches  turns  to  gold.3 
John  Bell,  sixty-three  years  old,  was  a  timid  politician  of  the 
metaphysical  school,  with  his  face  turned  toward  both  the 
North  and  the  South ;  his  mind  was  never  made  up. 
P William  H.  Seward  may  be  set  over  William  L.  Yancey  as 
a  popular  leader.  By  far  the  most  prominent  Republican 
speeches  of  the  campaign  were  those  of  Seward,  delivered  on 
a  long  tour  through  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  Ohio,  Indiana, 
Michigan,  Wisconsin,  Illinois,  Kansas,  and  Missouri.  Every 

1  The  Life  and  Works  of  William  Cullen  Bryant,  ed.  by  Parke  Goodwin, 
New  York,  1883-1884,  II,  142. 

2  The  "spot"  resolutions  called  upon  the  President  to  communicate 
to  the  House  of  Representatives  at  what  spot  the  Mexican  war  began; 
the  House  never  acted  on  the  resolutions. 

3  The  Fayette  and  Union  Telegraph,  Connersville,  Indiana,  February  24, 
1860. 


LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN     (213 

speech  was  fresh,  without  repetition  of  former  utterances,  .- 
and  far  outclassed  the  ordinary  stump  speech  in  fervency  of  / 
utterance,  literary  quality,  elevation  of  thought,  and  great  / 
enthusiasm  on  the  part  of  the  auditors^!  Still  some  senti-  [ 
ments  ran  through  them  all,  the  " irrepressible  conflict," 
to  which  the  orator  now  returned  after  his  ill-judged 
apostasy  when  seeking  the  presidential  nomination,1  the 
evil  effects  of  slavery,  the  necessity  of  curbing  the  slave 
holders  in  the  territories  and  in  the  states,  the  absurdity  of 
secession,  the  manifest  destiny  of  the  United  States  to  ab 
sorb  all  the  continent,  and  the  transference  of  political  power 
from  the  East  to  the  West.  lit  was  as  the  oracle  of  the  party 
that  Seward  spoke.  Lincoln,  the  orator  scarcely  mentioned, 
and  when  he  did  condescend  to  refer  to  the  candidate,  it  was 
done  curtly.  Returning  homeward  Seward's  party  reached 
Springfield,  Illinois,  where  the  proud,  haughty,  domineering 
New  Yorker  never  left  the  railroad  car.  Far  from  it.  But 
Abraham  Lincoln,  humble  American,  one  in  a  large  crowd, 
came  to  the  depot  and  nudged  his  way  through  the  crowd  to 
Seward's  car  and  into  it ;  Seward  rose,  shook  hands  with  the 
visitor,  introduced  him  to  the  members  of  the  little  party, 
then  again  sat  down  !  There  was  no  conversation.  Finally, 
to  relieve  the  situation,  Seward  made  a  short  speech  to  the 
people  and  Lincoln  found  his  way  out  of  the  car  as  best  he 
could.2  Every  second  of  the  tune  the  easterner's  attitude 
of  mind  was  evident  —  he  felt  that  he  was  superior  to  Lincoln 
and  did  not  try  to  conceal  it.J  Admirers  of  both  men  could 
wish  that  the  incident  had  never  happened.  Why  did  Sew 
ard  choose  to  humiliate  Lincoln  ?  Why  did  he  not  defer  to 
his  formally  designated  leader,  render  him  homage  as  the 
party's  candidate,  and  pay  him  a  social  visit  in  his  home? 

1  See  pp.  119-120. 

2  One  account  had  it  that  the  Seward  party  left  the  car  and  proceeded 
a  few  feet  from  it ;  then,  for  some  reason  which  was  not  given,  returned  to 
the  car. 


214  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Personal  conceit  and  pride  furnish  the  only  explanation.  The 
Senator  was  not  satisfied  with  being  universally  named  as 
the  next  Secretary  of  State;  he  judged  that  the  first  place 
was  rightfully  his.  In  this  connection  a  comment  of  the  New 
York  Herald  is  most  illuminating.  Lincoln,  in  his  generar 
unfitness,  would  require  some  one  to  run  the  government 
for  him,  and  Seward,  who  saw  this  and  coveted  the  place  for 
himself,  was  giving  his  support  to  the  ticket,  faint  as  it  was, 
to  win  the  substance  if  not  the  honors  of  power,  dominance 
over  the  inferior  man's  mind.  Deprived  of  the  nomination, 
he  nevertheless  sought  the  post  of  the  real  President.  What  a 
startling  and  prophetic  utterance,  in  view  of  the  attitude  of 
Seward  toward  his  master  at  the  beginning  of  the  coming 
administration ! 1 

William  L.  Yancey  was  the  "  Great  Precipitator,"  the 
"  Seward  of  the  South."  Early  in  life  he  served  a  state 
prison  sentence  for  murder  of  a  kinsman,  then  became  a 
successful  editor,  member  of  the  state  Senate  of  Alabama  and 
of  the  United  States  House  of  Representatives;  he  had 
favored  nullification  in  Jackson's  time,  and  since  1848  had 
been  a  secessionist  of  the  extreme  type.  In  his  oratory  he 
displayed  great  powers  as  a  logician,  skill  in  making  the  worse 
appear  the  better  reason,  and  infinite  tact  in  dealing  with  an 
audience;  he  possessed  humor  and  sarcasm,  and  unusual 
pride  in  his  position  as  the  leader  of  the  Southern  movement. 
No  man  ever  put  the  arguments  of  the  South  more  powerfully. 

Late  in  the  campaign,  in  order  probably  to  shatter  the 
belief  that  the  slaveholders  really  desired  the  election  of 
Lincoln  and  to  make  it  evident  that  he  was  doing  all  in  his 
power  to  ward  off  abolitionism,  he  made  a  speaking  tour 

1  The  New  York  Herald,  August  16,  1860.  The  reader  should  here 
recall  Seward's  memorandum  to  the  President,  entitled  "Some  thoughts 
for  the  President's  consideration,  April  1,  1861,"  in  which  he  mildly  sug 
gested  to  Lincoln  that  the  latter  was  not  fit  to  be  at  the  executive  head  of 
the  government  and  that  he  should  turn  this  task  over  to  him,  Seward. 
The  document  is  given  in  full  in  Hart's  Contemporaries,  IV,  293. 


m 

LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN        215 

through  nearly  all  the  large  cities  of  the  North,  where,  be 
cause  of  curiosity  to  see  and  hear  the  archconspirator,  a 
respectful  welcome  was  always  accorded  him.  Many  ques 
tions  were  asked  him.  "But  suppose  Old  Abe  is  elected? 
what  are  you  going  to  do  about  it  ?"  some  one  asked  him  at 
Baltimore.  "I  suppose  you  live  in  a  slave  state,  my  friend  ? " 
"I  do,"  came  the  answer.  "Well,  then,  just  let  me  ask  you  a 
question  by  way  of  clearing  the  ground,  and  when  you  answer, 
I  will  answer  you."  "Ask  on."  Yancey  then  asked  the  ques 
tioner  what  he  would  do  if,  after  Old  Abe  was  elected,  another 
John  Brown  were  to  invade  Virginia  at  the  head  of  five 
thousand  men,  poison  all  the  wells,  set  fire  to  all  the  houses, 
cities,  and  towns,  murder  all  the  women  and  children,  set 
free  all  the  negroes,  rob  all  the  banks,  drive  out  all  the  whites, 
and  take  possession  of  the  whole  state.  He  finished  and 
waited  in  triumph  for  the  reply.  It  was  instantaneous. 
"We'd  stop  him  before  he  got  to  all  that."  At  the  timely 
answer  one  irrepressible  burst  of  laughter  greeted  the  orator, 
in  which  the  latter  was  forced  to  join  to  save  himself.  This 
secession  issue,  in  all  the  Northern  cities,  he  uniformly 
evaded,  and  his  evasions,  in  a  land  where  Douglas'  honest 
stand  was  very  popular,  undoubtedly  lost  Breckenridge  many 
votes.1  At  Boston,  when  confronted  by  three  cheers  for  Doug 
las,  he  regained  control  of  the  audience  by  calling  for  three 
cheers  for  the  Constitution  and  the  Union.  At  Cincinnati 
he  shouted  with  fervor  that  free  speech  was  not  denied  hi  the 
South  and  boldly  challenged  any  man  to  affirm  and  prove 
the  contrary ;  the  denial  was  immediately  forthcoming,  but 
proof  was  sharply  demanded  and  when  this  was  not  instan 
taneously  at  hand,  the  tricky  orator  emerged  in  a  triumphant 
blaze  of  oratory. 

At  Boston  he  declared:   "You  go  with  your  labor  where 
you  please."     A  voice  :  "No,  sir,  we  can't  go  South."     Yan 
cey  :  "Yes,  sir,  you  can  go  South.     There  isn't  a  man  among 
1  See  pp.  322-325  for  his  answer  in  New  York. 


216  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

you  who  is  not  welcome  if  he  doesn't  come  to  steal  our  nig 
gers.  We  have  plenty  of  Northern  men  in  our  city ;  they 
do  not  try  to  steal  our  property,  or  to  incite  rebellion,  arid 
they  stay.  But  let  any  one  come  with  a  lighted  torch  to 
this  magazine  under  us,  to  blow  us  up  and  to  destroy  our 
society,  we  would  be  less  than  men  if  we  did  not  hang  him  to 
the  highest  tree." 

The  newspapers  of  the  next  morning,  reporting  this  Boston 
utterance,  told  also  of  a  young  Boston  school-teacher,  who 
by  invitation  had  gone  to  Alabama  to  take  charge  of  an 
academy.  After  remaining  at  his  post  but  one  day,  a  sermon 
by  Henry  Ward  Beecher  and  a  letter  from  Charles  Sumner 
were  found  in  his  trunk ;  ducking  in  the  pond  was  at  once 
administered,  and  then  the  culprit  had  to  leave.  The  story 
was  culled  from  the  Southern  papers  themselves.  Said  the 
Richmond  Despatch,  at  about  the  same  time,  concerning  the 
fate  of  three  Northerners  in  Orange  Court  House,  Virginia : 
"On  Saturday  night  they  were  waited  upon  by  a  committee 
of  armed  citizens  and  marched  at  the  point  of  the  bayonet  to ' 
the  depot,  while  the  " Rogues'  March"  was  played,  as  be 
fitted  the  occasion.  Here  they  were  compelled  to  get  on 
the  cars."  The  Charleston  Mercury  reported  :  "  Served  him 
right.  A  man  named  William  S.  McClure,  hailing  from  the 
state  of  Maine,  was  on  Saturday  last,  by  order  of  the  Vigi 
lance  Committee,  whipped  by  a  negro  at  Grahamville  for 
tampering  with  slaves  in  that  vicinity.  McClure  was  then 
placed  on  the  cars  of  the  Charleston  and  Savannah  Railroad 
and  arrived  in  this  city  yesterday  and  given  in  charge  of  the 
Mayor  who  will  ship  him  by  the  first  conveyance  to  the 
North."  Lurid  tales  came  out  of  Texas,  how  a  Northern 
colporteur,  with  Bibles,  religious  books,  histories,  school- 
books,  and  atlases,  was  arrested,  flogged,  and  finally  hung 
and  burned  for  having  with  him  a  copy  of  the  Impending 
Crisis;  how  more  John  Browns  were  at  work  there,  rousing 
the  slaves  to  insurrection,  burning  towns,  and  spreading 


LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN        217 

universal  terror;   and  how  finally  three  Northern  preachers 
were  hanged. 

These  reports  from  the  Lone  Star  state  and  some  from  the 
other  Southern  states  may  have  been  exaggerated  for  cam 
paign  purposes,  but  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  a  majority 
^oi  instances  the  accounts  of  the  persecutions  of  Northern 
men  in  the  land  of  slavery  were  true;  they  were  believed 
in  the  North  by  the  masses  of  the  people,  who  looked  upon 
them  not  so  much  as  political  buncombe,  but  rather  as  the 
natural  continuation  of  the  similar  attacks  that  undeniably 
characterized  the  Southern  reaction  after  John  Brown's  raid. 
Scarcely  a  local  community  in  any  free  state  lacked  a  hero,! 
who  by  bitter  personal  experience  had  learned  the  lesson  of 
Southern  despotism.  Thus  the  masses  of  the  Northern  peo 
ple,  in  their  daily  following  of  current  events,  in  their  daily 
reading  of  the  small  local  press,  and  in  their  daily  village 
conversation  and  reflection  saw  clearly  one  phase  at  least  of 
slaveholding  society  at  more  or  less  close  range ;  and  they 
were  coming  to  despise  the  Southerners  as  more  cruel,  ar 
bitrary  and  despotic  than  even  the  terrible  Mexicans  or  the 
bloodthirsty  Austrians  in  Italy. 

By  these  home  facts  many  a  Northern  audience  and  many 
a  Northern  newspaper  shrewdly  parried  Yancey's  eloquent 
appeals ;  his  oratory,  rhetoric,  skillful  reasoning,  and  fervid 
appeals  to  brotherhood,  nationality,  and  the  constitution  fell 
flat. 

Yancey's  leading  theme  was  the  impending  danger  to 
slavery.  "  Suppose  the  Republican  party  gets  into  power, 
suppose  another  John  Brown  raid  takes  place  in  a  frontier 
state,  and  suppose  Sharp's  rifles  and  pikes  and  bowie  knives 
and  all  the  other  implements  of  warfare  are  brought  to  bear 
on  an  inoffensive  people,  and  that  Lincoln  or  Seward  is  in 
power,  where  will  there  be  a  force  of  United  States  marines 
to  check  that  band  ?  Suppose  that  is  the  case  —  that  the 
frontiers  of  the  country  will  be  lighted  up  by  the  flames  of 


218  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

midnight  arson,  as  in  the  case  of  Texas,  that  our  towns  are 
burned,  that  the  peace  of  our  families  is  disturbed,  that 
poison  is  found  secreted  throughout  the  whole  country,  in 
order  that  it  may  be  placed  in  our  springs  and  in  our  wells  ; 
with  arms  and  ammunition  placed  in  the  hands  of  this  semi- 
barbarous  people,  what  will  be  our  fate  ?  Where  will  be  the 
United  States  Marshals  to  interfere?  Where  will  be  the 
dread  of  this  general  government  that  exists  under  this  pres 
ent  administration?  Where  will  be  the  fear  of  Federal 
officers  to  intimidate  or  to  prevent  such  movements  ?  Why, 
gentlemen,  if  Texas  is  now  in  flames,  and  the  peace  of  Vir 
ginia  is  invaded  now,  under  this  administration,  and  under 
the  present  aspect  of  things,  tell  me  what  it  will  be  when  a 
higher  law  government  reigns  in  the  city  of  Washington? 
Where  then  will  be  our  peace,  where  our  safety,  when  these 
people  are  instigated  to  insurrection,  when  men  are  prowling 
about  this  whole  country,  knowing  that  they  are  protected' 
by  an  administration  that  says  that  by  the  constitution  free 
dom  is  guaranteed  to  every  individual  on  the  face  of  the 
earth  ?  Can  you  expect  any  people  of  spirit  or  courage,  and 
true  to  themselves,  to  their  firesides,  and  to  their  families, 
can  you  expect  such  a  people  to  render  allegiance  to  the  Con 
stitution,  permitted  to  be  trampled  under  foot  knowingly  by 
this  higher  law  government  ?  Can  you  expect  the  people  of 
the  South  to  give  such  a  government  their  assent  ?  "  1 

No  former  President  or  presidential  candidate  had  any 
prominence  in  the  campaign,  neither  Van  Buren,  Tyler, 
Fillmore,  Scott,  nor  Pierce ;  Fremont  was  entirely  out  of  the 
public  mind.  Even  President  Buchanan  himself  was  a 
solitary  figure.2  Without  indorsement  by  either  faction  of 
his  party  and  openly  accused  of  corruption  by  the  opposition, 

1  The  New  York  Herald,  September  22,  1860. 

2  Pierce  in  1856  was  indorsed  by  the  Democratic  national  convention  at 
Cincinnati  as  "true  to  the  Democratic  principles  and  therefore  true  to 
the  great  interests  of  the  country,"  and  ."unqualified  admiration"  was 
expressed  for  his  "measures  and  policy." 


LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN        219 

the  President  was  fast  losing  his  friends,  the  Springfield  Re 
publican  even  going  so  far  as  to  aver  that  in  the  memory  of 
those  then  in  middle  life  no  President  left  office  with  so  few 
friends.  Those  who  elected  him,  now  reviled  and  neglected 
him.  He  was  represented  as  old  and  infirm,  rapidly  losing 
his  intellectual  powers,  overwhelmed  by  the  magnitude  of  the 
responsibilities  devolving  upon  him,  and  extremely  eager 
to  quit  office.  Repeatedly  he  declared  against  a  second  term. 
In  the  spring,  speaking  to  a  large  company  of  newspaper 
editors  then  visiting  Washington  on  an  excursion,  he  said : 
"The  duties  of  the  presidency  are  severe  and  incessant.  I 
shall  soon  retire  from  them ;  and  if  my  successor  shall  be  as 
happy  in  coming  in  as  I  will  be  in  going  out,  he  will  be  one 
of  the  happiest  men  in  the  world.  (Laughter.)  While  I 
was  Minister  to  England  a  distinguished  nobleman  once  said 
to  me,  'Mr.  Buchanan,  if  I  were  to  judge  from  your  news 
papers,  I  should  infer  that  the  different  candidates  for  the 
presidency  were  the  greatest  rascals  in  America.7  (Laughter 
and  cheers.)  I  replied  that  it  did  look  so ;  but  it  was  really 
only  a  way  we  had  of  talking  about  each  other  at  election 
time.  (Hearty  laughter  and  applause.)  ...  I  shall  not 
desire  to  draw  a  single  breath  beyond  the  existence  of  this, 
our  beloved  Union."  1 

In  the  course  of  the  summer  the  President  made  a  political 
speech  in  Washington,  which,  as  it  was  generously  reported, 
appeared  to  be  very  eloquent.  But  his  voice  on  the  occasion 
was  weak,  almost  piping,  in  striking  contrast  to  his  strong 
voice  of  former  days  in  the  Senate ;  as  he  went  on,  he  gradu 
ally  weakened  and  could  hardly  be  heard.  He  spoke  from 
notes  and,  while  speaking,  frequently  withdrew  into  the  White 
House  to  sip  water.  Occasionally  he  was  interrupted  by 
some  one  in  the  crowd  calling  out,  "Go  it,  old  man"  and 
other  inappropriate  expressions,  which  he  would  notice  by 
leaving  his  sentence  and  saying,  "Well,  you  may  say,  my 

1  The  Washington  Constitution,  May  10,  1860. 


220  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

friend,  that  I  am  an  old  man/'  and  at  that  the  crowd  would 
laugh  and  jeer.1 

By  Democrats  as  well  as  Republicans  Henry  Clay  was 
reverently  remembered  for  his  dashing  leadership,  his  great 
statesmanship,  his  oratory,  and  the  love  of  his  fellow-men, 
and  parties  vied  with  one  another  in  claiming  devotion  to 
his  principles.  Occasionally  the  "Godlike  Webster"  was  on 
men's  lips,  but  little  attention  was  paid  to  that  statesman's 
views  and  still  less  personal  affection  for  him  expressed.  The 
same  with  John  C.  Calhoun,  whose  cold  and  unconquerable 
logic  was  sometimes  called  to  mind,  but  never  his  person 
ality;  much  of  the  credit  for  his  views  was  reaped  by  his 
successor,  William  L.  Yancey. 

Next  to  Seward  the  most  popular  man  in  his  party  but 
with  qualities  very  different  from  those  of  the  distinguished 
Senator,  was  Horace  Greeley,  editor  of  the  New  York  Trib 
une.  During  the  Republican  national  convention  in  Chi 
cago  admiring  crowds  constantly  attended  him,  and  at  the 
party's  ratification  meeting  in  New  York  City,  the  night 
after  the  election,  he  was  acclaimed  with  mighty  cheers  as 
the  hero  of  the  meeting,  the  greatest  Republican  present. 
"Of  all  men  in  the  nation  who  have  aided  forward  the  aus 
picious  result,  no  other  man  has  done  more  than  he,"  said 
Theodore  Tilton,  chairman  of  the  meeting;  "never  flowed 
nobler  blood  in  any  man's  veins  than  beats  in  that  man's 
heart."  By  common  consent  the  New  York  Tribune  was 
ranked  with  the  New  York  Herald  and  the  New  York  Times, 
the  greatest  American  newspapers;  the  Weekly  Tribune 
confessedly  had  a  more  widespread  circulation  than  any 
other  paper,  enjoying  as  it  did  a  large  sale  in  every  country 
district  of  the  North;  on  the  editorial  pages  of  these  daily 
and  weekly  editions,  with  a  literary  brilliancy  and  wit  which 

1  This  was  the  President's  only  public  participation  in  the  campaign. 
For  the  description  of  the  strange  and  pathetic  scene,  see  the  New  York 
World,  July  14,  1860. 


LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN       221 

to  this  day  still  appeal  to  a  reader  as  the  most  pleasurable  of 
all  contemporary  utterances,  he  aroused,  informed,  and 
guided  public  opinion  to  a  remarkable  degree,  and  always 
left  a  lasting  impression  for  human  liberty.  Uncouth  in. 
manners  and  appearance  but  of  big  heart  and  mighty  brain,  i 
he  was  by  common  consent  the  newspaper  champion  of  Black 
Republicanism,  a  typical  Yankee.1 

In  the  cc^ducj}j^Lthe-eaaTipaign  one  factor  ever  present  in 
the  minds  of  the  leaders  of  all  parties  was  the  possibility  that 
the  election  might  fall  into  the  House  of  Representatives 
through  a  failure  of  the  people  to  elect.  As  soon  as  the 
disruption  of  the  Charleston  convention  loomed  up  as  a 
possibility,  the  charge  was  made  that  the  South  was  pre 
paring  to  bring  about  this  result  through  a  split  in  their 
own  party  and  the  consequent  creation  of  a  strong  third 
party;  thus  an  election  by  the  people  would  be  prevented, 
in  which  contingency  the  national  House  alone  could  decide 
the  issue.  This,  it  was  charged,  was  the  chosen  method  for 
disrupting  the  Union,  for  the  tumultuous  House  might  well 
fail  to  settle  a  majority  vote  on  one  of  three  candidates  for 
the  presidency,  the  Senate  might  fail  to  unite  on  one  of  two 
candidates  for  the  vice  presidency,  and  there  then  would  be 
no  government.  The  Constitution  made  no  provision  for 
such  a  contingency.2 

1  In  his  eulogy  Til  ton  went  on :   "Sixteen  years  ago,  on  the  third  night 
after  the  election  of  1844,  he  (Greeley)  was  sitting  in  his  office  awaiting  the 
returns  from  St.  Lawrence  County,  which  were  to  decide  for  the  state  and 
the  nation.      The  river  boat   Empire  brought  down  the  figures;    crowds 
were  gathered  on  the  pier  watching  her  approach.     The  Tribune  office  was 
deserted  by  all  but  one  man,  and  that  was  its  editor.     He  sat  alone  in  his 
office  till  a  messenger  broke  in  upon  him  with  the  adverse  news.     He 
read  the  message  and  then  burst  into  tears.     Well,  they  were  manly  tears. 
But  on  Tuesday  night  last  the  same  man  was  sitting  in  his  office,  and 
as  hour  after  hour  only  brought  better  and  better  news,  the  expression  on 
his  face  grew  into  brighter  smiles." 

2  There  were  fourteen  Democratic  states  in  the  House,  fifteen  Repub 
lican  and  one  American;    Kentucky  was  divided  five  to  five,  Maryland 


222  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

In  solemn  language  the  Republicans  appealed  to  the  people 
to  elect  the  Republican  candidates  and  prevent  strife  in  the 
House.  In  an  election  in  the  House  much  would  depend  on 
how  the  speaker  used  his  power  of  appointment  of  commit 
tees  and  his  other  patronage.1  Disputes  would  arise  as  to 
how  each  state  delegation  should  decide  its  vote,  whether 
by  plurality,  majority,  unanimously,  or  even  by  a  minority 
vote ;  the  law  was  silent  here  and  precedent  was  not  binding. 
Among  the  members  excitement  would  run  high,  for  they 
would  be  fresh  from  the  passions  and  the  excitement  of  the 
presidential  contest  before  the  people.  The  bare  choice  of 
a  speaker  had  roused  them  to  fury;  many  had  then  gone 
armed ;  threats  of  violence  had  been  freely  uttered ;  blows 
had  been  given  and  more  than  once  it  had  seemed  that  the 
country  might  be  on  the  verge  of  anarchy.  Yet,  aside  from 
the  moral  effect  of  victory,  the  only  thing  at  stake  was  the 
appointment  of  committees  and  of  fifteen  or  twenty  minor 
officials.  How  would  it  be  when  the  presidency  was  the 
prize,  with  its  control  of  eighty  millions  of  the  public  money 
annually  and  the  appointment  of  thirty  thousand  public 
officials,  absolute  veto  on  legislation,  control  of  treaties  and 
foreign  relations,  and  the  general  pilotage  of  the  Republic  ? 
Could  any  public  man  desirous  of  peace,  contemplate  with 
out  horror  the  scenes  that  would  probably  result  ?  No  one 

three  to  three,  and  North  Carolina  four  to  four ;  in  Illinois  an  anti-Lecomp- 
ton  Democrat  held  the  balance  of  power.  The  Constitution  said  that 
Congress  should  provide  for  vacancies  in  the  presidency  and  in  the  vice 
presidency,  occasioned  by  removal,  death,  resignation,  or  inability  to 
serve ;  and  in  1792  Congress  declared  that  in  the  absence  of  both  the  Presi 
dent  and  vice  president  the  president  pro  tempore  of  the  Senate  should 
succeed  to  the  presidency,  and  after  him  the  speaker  of  the  House.  But 
this  was  not  applicable  to  a  failure  to  elect.  If  in  this  contingency 
Congress  ordered  a  new  election,  a  point  would  be  strained. 

1  Some  said  that  the  possibility  of  the  House  election  was  one  of  the 
elements  that  embittered  the  speakership  contest  in  the  House  the  previous 
winter ;  to  gain  the  speakership  was  but  a  step  in  the  struggle  for  the  prize 
of  the  presidency,  which  it  was  predicted  would  be  awarded  by  the  House. 


LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN       223 

could  suppose  that  the  men  who  now  threatened  to  break 
up  the  Union  if  Lincoln  were  elected,  would  allow  him  to  be  - 
elected  by  the  House,  if  menaces,  blows,  daggers,  and  pistols ' 
could  prevent  it.     A  contest  would  be  inevitable,  and  as  it 
went  on,  citizens  by  the  thousand  would  gather  in  Washing 
ton,  street  fights  would  ensue,  the  House  would  be  invaded, 
and  civil  war  might  be  precipitated  at  once.1 

The  House  failing  to  elect,  the  Senate  might  quickly  pro 
ceed  to  choose  the  Breckenridge  vice  presidential  candidate, 
Lane,  as  Vice  President,  who  then  would  become  President. 
The  claim  was  made  that  the  choice  really  lay  between 
Lincoln  and  Lane.  Or  the  Senate  might  fail  to  make  any 
selection.2 

In  addition  to  these  possibilities  in  the  manipulation  of  a 
Congressional  election  of  the  President  and  Vice  President, 
another  possible  way  to  beat  Lincoln  was  through  fusion  of 
parties,  and  in  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  New  Jersey,  Rhode 
Island,  and  perhaps  one  or  two  other  states,  this  was  accom 
plished.  As  arranged  by  a  special  fusion  committee  in  New 
York,  that  state's  thirty-five  members  in  its  electoral  college^ 
were  to  be  divided,  in  case  the  Democrats  won  the  election* 
before  the!  people,  eighteen  for  Douglas,  ten  for  Bell,  and 
seven  for  Breckenridge.  Similarly,  in  other  states  there  was 
the  gentlemen's  agreement  of  fusionists  that  if  it  appeared 
that  Douglas  would  win  in  a  state  electoral  college,  then  the 
fusionist  electors  of  that  state  were  to  vote  for  him,  and  for 
Breckenridge  if  it  appeared  that  he  was  to  be  the  winner. 
The  liability  of  confusion  and  dispute  in  the  arrangement 
was  obvious ;  how  it  would  work  in  actual  practice  was  not 
explained.  To  such  an  extent  are  the  electoral  colleges  of 
the  states  mere  customary  institutions. 

1  The  New  York  Times,  October  8,  1860. 

2  Henry  J.  Raymond  frequently  spoke  on  this  subject ;   David  Dudley 
Field  devoted  an  entire  speech  to  it  in  Philadelphia.      Almost  every 
Republican  speaker  sounded  the  alarm,  "  Lincoln  or  Lane !" 


224  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

The  lack  of  sincere  political  principle  displayed  by  the 
parties  entering  into  these  bargains  and  agreements  did  not 
escape  comment.  Where  were  true  Democratic  principles  ? 
was  sneeringly  inquired  of  what  was  contemptuously  styled 
the  "Dry  Goods  Electoral  Ticket/'  and  who  was  its  au 
thorized  expositor,  Douglas,  Breckenridge,  or  Bell?  The 
Republicans  were  the  only  party  that  stood  for  moral  prin 
ciple.  To  Douglas'  personal  credit  be  it  added  that  he 
openly  repudiated  fusion,  though  the  partial  success  of  the 
movement  would  seem  to  make  it  appear  that  he  privately 
consented. 

Jefferson  Davis  is  authority  for  the  statement  that  both 
Bell  and  Breckenridge,  in  order  to  unite  the  divided  forces 
opposed  to  Republicanism,  agreed  to  withdraw  if  only  Doug 
las  would  do  the  same,  but  that  the  Illinoisian  steadfastly 
refused  his  consent.  Such  an  attitude  would  accord  with 
Douglas'  well  known  characteristic  of  persistency.1 

The  spoils  system,  in  that  heyday  of  its  power  and  prestige, 
was  used  unsparingly  against  Douglas  and  for  Breckenridge. 
"Heads  off!"  like  the  relentless  cry  of  an  avenging  fury, 
seemed  to  pursue  every  Douglas  man  in  office.  "The  Presi 
dent  told  me,"  Douglas  said  over  and  over  again  in  his 
speeches,  "that  if  I  did  not  obey  him  and  vote  to  force  the 
Lecompton  constitution  upon  the  people  of  Kansas  against 
their  will,  he  would  take  off  the  head  of  every  friend  I  had 
in  office." 2  Buchanan  denied  this,  although  habitually 
acting  with  the  motives  attributed.3  Douglas  custom  offi 
cials  in  Boston,  Albany,  Troy,  and  Burlington,  Vermont,  were 
removed,  also  postmasters  faithful  to  Douglas  in  Memphis, 
Tennessee,  Salem,  Massachusetts,  Woodstock,  Vermont,  in 
three  small  towns  in  Indiana,  in  Columbus,  Ohio,  Albion, 

1  The  Rise  and  Fall  of  the  Confederate  Government,  by  Jefferson  Davis, 
New  York,  1881,  I,  52. 

2  The  New  York  Semi-Weekly  Evening  Post,  September  15,  1860. 

3  The  Washington  Constitution,  September  7,  1860. 


LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN        225 

New  York,  and  Rutland,  Vermont.  This  prostitution  of 
public  office  was  taken  as  a  matter  of  course  by  the  public 
as  well  as  by  the  President.1  Without  the  least  suggestion 
of  condemnation,  a  leading  paper  declared  that  in  the  event 
of  the  success  of  the  Republicans  there  would  be  the  biggest 
sweep  in  offices  since  the  time  of  Jackson;  Harrison  and 
Taylor  had  died  too  soon  to  effect  many  removals  of  the  en 
trenched  Democrats,  but  Lincoln  was  expected  to  make  an 
absolutely  clean  sweep  and  all  were  ready.2 

fTlie  most  unique  and  original  popular  feature  of  the  cam 
paign  were  the  Republican  marching  clubs,  the  Wide  Awakes. 
Late  in  February  at  the  beginning  of  the  short  campaign 
previous  to  the  spring  state  election,  Cassius  M.  Clay,  a 
stanch  Republican  from  the  slave  state  of  Kentucky,  visited 
Hartford,  Connecticut,  to  deliver  a  partisan  address.  Ex 
citement  ran  high.  To  do  escort  duty  from  the  depot  a 
number  of  young  Republicans,  some  of  them  not  yet  voters, 
volunteered  their  services,  and  borrowing  torches  from  the 
fire  company  house  and  protecting  their  coats  by  glazed 
capes,  with  their  quickly  improvised  torchlight  procession 
they  made  the  most  interesting  political  demonstration  ever 
seen  in  the  city.  Within  a  week  a  regular  company  of  Wide 
Awakes  of  fifty  members  was  formed ;  soon  there  were  hun 
dreds  of  members  in  the  one  city  and  many  clubs  over  the 

1  The  Works  of  James  Buchanan,  collected  and  ed.  by  John   Basset 
Moore,  Philadelphia,  and  London,  1908-1910,  X,  460.     In  the  letter  deny 
ing  the  conversation  with  Douglas,  in  which  the  latter  charged  that  the 
President  had  threatened  to  take  off  the  heads  of  the  Douglas  men  in 
office,  Buchanan  said:    "Besides  I  have  not  removed  one  in  ten  of  his 
friends,  and  not  one  of  his  relatives.     Even  among  those  of  his  friends 
who  have  rendered  themselves  prominently  hostile  to  the  measures  of  the 
administration,  a  majority  still  remain  in  office."     This  surely  is  an  indirect 
admission  that  the  President  was  to  some  extent  using  his  patronage 
against  Douglas.      See  the  Washington  Constitution,  September   7,  1860. 

2  The  New  York  Herald,  October  12,  1860.     The  Executive  Journal  of 
the  United  States  Senate  discloses  the  fact  of  many  removals  from  office  by 
the  President  at  this  time. 


226  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

whole  state ;  within  four  weeks  two  thousand  Wide  Awakes 
from  the  surrounding  towns  attended  the  dedication  of 
a  lodge  for  the  first  society  and  took  part  in  a  great 
parade,  while  within  a  few  months  four  hundred  thousand 
members  were  enrolled  in  the  numerous  societies  in  every 
state  of  the  North.  The  idea  spread  like  wildfire^) 

(The  preamble  of  the  constitution  of  the  unique  organiza 
tion  ran  as  follows:  "We,  the  undersigned,  young  men  of 
the  city  of  Hartford,  desirous  of  securing  the  ascendency  and 
perpetuity  of  the  principles  of  the  Republican  party,  and 
the  election  of  its  candidates  for  office,  and  to  all  places  of 
honor  and  trust  in  the  government,  do  hereby  explicitly 
.declare  our  devotion  to  the  Constitution  and  the  Union,  our 
'opposition  to  interference  with  slavery  in  the  states  where 
iit  now  legally  exists,  and  our  unqualified  and  unalterable 
I  determination  to  resist  by  all  constitutional  means  its  further 
extension  and  pledge  ourselves  to  use  all  honorable  means 
for  the  success  and  triumph  of  the  Republican  party,  and  of 
the  election  of  its  candidates  to  office."  There  were  regular 
weekly  meetings,  and  military  drill,  but  no  secret  meetings 
or  grips  or  pass  words ;  in  the  marching  the  officers  carried 
lanterns,  the  private  members  torches.^? 

\Harper's  Weekly  published  a  two-page  picture  of  the 
demonstration  of  the  society  in  New  York.  Fifth  Avenue 
was  a  blaze  of  light  from  the  torches,  lanterns,  and  fireworks, 
and  crowded  with  fifty  thousand  people  to  witness  the 
parade ;  from  the  city  alone  there  were  five  thousand  Wide 
Awakes  in  line,  five  thousand  more  from  Connecticut, 
Rhode  Island,  and  even  Maine.  Among  the  mottoes  and 
transparencies  were  the  following:  "Free  soil,  free  speech, 
and  free  men;"  "Free  Homesteads;"  "The  United  States 
is  rich  enough  to  give  us  all  a  farm;"  "Eternal  Vigilance  is 
the  price  of  liberty;"  "The  Union  must  be  preserved  — 
Jackson  pp"  The  territories  must  be  free  to  the  people;" 
1  The  New  York  Herald,  September  19,  1860. 


LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN        227 

"Free  soil  for  freemen."  To  the  Liberator,  the  parade  of  the 
society  in  Boston  was  the  most  imposing  political  demonstra 
tion  ever  witnessed  in  that  city.  Ten  thousand  men  were 
in  line,  including  seven  thousand  horsemen.  Some  of  the 
transparencies  were :  "  Free  labor  and  free  men  all  over  God's 
heritage;"  "The  Pilgrims  did  not  found  our  empire  for 
slavery;"  "Plymouth  Rock,  the  corner  stone  of  a  free 
Republic;"  "No  more  slave  territories."  Two  hundred 
negroes  had  as  their  banner,  "God  never  made  a  tyrant  or  a 
slave;"  along  with  a  company  of  thirty-eight  negroes  went 
the  banner,  "Liberty  throughout  all  the  world."  Mottoes 
at  Batavia,  New  York,  were:  "Opposition  to  the  extension 
of  slavery  in  the  territories;"  "Protection  to  American 
industries;"  "Equal  privileges  for  all  citizens;"  "Home 
steads  for  all  actual  settlers;"  "River  and  harbor  improve 
ments;"  "Do  not  destroy  that  immortal  charter  of  liberty, 
the  Declaration  of  Independence;"  "Champions  of  free 
dom."  At  Syracuse,  New  York:  "The  Republican  plat 
form  :  to  man,  his  birthright ;  to  labor,  freedom ;  to  him  that 
wants  to  labor,  work  and  independence ;  to  him  that  works, 
his  dues ;"  Douglas  was  pictured  riding  on  the  black  horse  of 
the  South,  and  the  white  horse  of  the  North,  the  horses  part, 
and  with  one  hand  pointing  to  the  Dred  Scott  decision  and 
the  other  to  popular  sovereignty  Douglas  cries:  "Oh!  my 
platform;"  a  plantation  scene,  with  an  overseer,  whip  in 
hand,  was  placarded:  "Bad  for  America;"  "Protection  to 
American  Industries ;"  "Abraham  Lincoln  does  care  whether 
slavery  is  voted  up  or  voted  down ; "  "Lincoln  and  free  home 
steads."  At  Springfield,  Illinois:  "Pass  the  homestead 
bill  and  that  will  settle  the  slavery  question;"  "Illinois 
railmakers  will  fence  in  the  niggers;"  "Free  labor  elevates, 
slave  labor  degrades;"  "United  we  stand,  divided  we  fall;  " 
"Followers  of  Henry  Clay,  the  man  who  did  care;"  "Old 
Abe,  one  of  Hammond's  mudsills;"  "That  160  acres  we 
must  have;"  "We  do  care  whether  slavery  is  voted  up  or 
voted  down." 


228  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

(The  procession  at  this  great  meeting  in  Springfield  was 
unique.  It  stretched  for  eight  miles  and  was  many  hours 
in  passing  Lincoln's  home;  thousands  were  on  foot,  on 
horses,  and  in  wagons.  One  hundred  and  three  wagons 
carried  twelve  hundred  persons  from  the  surrounding  towns. 
In  imitation  of  the  overland  travelers  to  the  far  West,  the 
farmers  had  fitted  up  their  wagons  with  bedding,  cooking 
utensils,  and  food,  and  bringing  the  whole  family  had  come 
in  from  miles  around ;  the  custom  dated  back  to  1840.  In 
each  delegation  there  was  generally  one  wagon  gayly  deco 
rated  and  filled  with  young  ladies,  clad  in  white  dresses; 
there  were  couples  of  ladies  and  gentlemen  on  gayly  capari 
soned  horses,  there  were  flatboats  and  schooners,  and 
finally  a  woolen  mill  making  clothes  in  the  procession  and 
bearing  the  inscription:  " Protection  to  American  Indus 
tries."  1 

The  Democrats  did  not  dare  to  copy  the  magnificently 
successful  society  of  the  Republicans,  but  they  had  their 
marching  clubs  known  under  various  names,  such  as  the 
"Ever  Readys,"  "Little  Giants,"  "Invincibles,"  "Douglas 
guards,"  etc.  The  following  were  displayed  at  Washington, 
D.C.,  as  Breckenridge  mottoes:  "Democracy  is  good  for 
all;"  "Let  millions  join  in  the  loud  refrain,  ' Hurrah  for 
Breckenridge  and  Lane7;"  "No  rail  party  or  union  split 
ters;"  "Cuba  must  be  ours;"  "Iron  bands  shall  soon  unite 
the  Atlantic  with  the  Pacific;"  "Breckenridge,  the  man  of 
destiny."  In  the  fusion  parade  in  New  York,  participated 
in  by  thirty  thousand  marchers  and  requiring  three  hours 
to  pass  a  single  point,  were  the  following:  "No  North,  no 
South,  no  East,  no  West;"  "The  Whole  Union;"  "The 
Union  must  and  shall  be  preserved;"  "Black  Republicans 
at  war  with  every  principle  of  the  constitution ;"  "We  want 
none  but  white  men  at  the  helm;"  "United  we  stand,  di- 

1  The  Weekly  Illinois  State  Journal,  Springfield,  Illinois,  August  15, 
1860. 


LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN        229 

vided  we  fall;"  "No  rail  splitter  can  split  this  Union;" 
"Too  late  for  the  Black  Republicans  to  alter  the  constitu 
tion;"  "We  want  a  statesman,  not  a  rail  splitter  as  presi 
dent;"  "The  Union  and  the  Constitution;"  "We  will 
defend  the  Union  or  die  in  the  last  ditch;"  "Down  with 
the  Black  Republican  flag  of  Disunion;"  "No  niggers  are 
allowed  in  this  club ;"  "I  see  the  nigger  peeping  through  the 
fence;"  "Billy  Seward  and  his  three  aunties,  Aunty  Mason, 
Aunty  Rent,  and  Aunty  Slavery."  1  Douglas  mottoes  at 
St.  Louis  read :  "We  will  march  to  the  music  of  the  Union ;" 
"Popular  sovereignty,  the  great  bulwark  of  American 
Independence;"  "We  are  opposed  to  all  sectional  parties;" 
"The  Union  must  and  shall  be  preserved;"  "Douglas,  the 
great  defender  of  the  rights  of  the  people."  At  the  Douglas 
parade  in  Belleville,  Illinois,  there  were  the  usual  decorated 
wagons,  bands  of  music  and  flaming  banners.  One  wagon 
was  a  model  of  the  ship  Constitution,  twenty  feet  long,  fully 
rigged  and  manned  by  thirteen  boys ;  another  bore  officers 
and  soldiers  of  the  war  of  1812,  a  third  the  heroes  of  the 
battle  of  Buena  Vista.  Three  different  towns  were  repre 
sented  by  delegations  of  thirty-three  ladies  on  horseback, 
each  clad  in  blue  skirt  and  white  waist,  and  with  a  brown 
straw  hat  trimmed  injed,  white,  and  blue,  to  typify  the 
sisterhood  of  the  states/^/ 

Southerners  affected  to  construe  the  existence  of  the  Wide 
Awakes  into  a  military  menace  to  then*  section ;  the  military 
discipline  practiced,  the  order,  the  drill,  and  the  marching, 
were  only  in  preparation  for  the  defense  of  Lincoln's  inaugu 
ration  and  of  the  North  in  general,  when  it  came  to  blows.3 

1  The  New  York  Herald,  October  24,  1860. 

2  The  Daily  Missouri  Republican,  August  23,  1860.     The  same,  October 
2,  1860,  contains  a  take-off  on  the  names  of  the  Republican  candidates, 
arranged  thus, 

Ham  lin        Hum  bug 
Lin    coin      Bug    bear. 

3  The  New  York  Times,  September  29,  1860,  quoting  the  Charleston 
Mercury  and  the  Richmond  Enquirer. 


230  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


Late  in  the  campaign  appeared  the  Southern  imitation,  the 
Minute  Men,  a  society  that  extended  rapidly  in  many  states. 
The  constitution  of  one  of  these  societies  at  Edgefield,  South 
Carolina,  ran  in  the  preamble  as  follows:  "We,  the  under 
signed,  citizens  of  South  Carolina,  in  view  of  the  impending 
crisis  necessarily  incident  upon  the  election  of  a  Black  Re 
publican  to  the  presidency  of  these  United  States,  and  in 
view  of  our  duties  to  our  section,  ourselves,  and  our  dearest 
interests,  which  must  fall  in  the  event  of  the  triumph  of 
Northern  fanaticism,  hereby  form  ourselves  into  an  asso 
ciation,  under  the  name  and  style  of  Minute  Men,  and  we 
do  further  solemnly  pledge  'our  lives,  our  fortunes,  and  our 
sacred  honor'  to  sustain  Southern  constitutional  equality 
in  the  Union,  or  failing  that,  to  establish  our  independence 
out  of  it."  jj 

In  the  Democratic  papers  the  emblem  of  that  party  was 
a  rooster.  The  elephant  of  the  Republicans  was  not  yet 
prominent,  though  in  the  West  at  least  the  idea  was  not  un 
familiar  to  the  party  leaders.  At  the  head  of  the  column 
of  Republican  news  one  western  paper  pictured  an  elephant 
and  the  inscription,  "Clear  the  track."2  Q?he  streets  of  thef 
cities  in  all  sections  were  strung  with  banners  and  like-j 
nesses  of  the  different  candidates.  Pole-raisings  and  flag- 
raisings  were  common.  The  present  charges  as  to  the 
corrupt  use  of  money  in  a  presidential  campaign  were  prac 
tically  unknown,  as  was  also  campaign  violence.  Occa 
sionally  a  marching  club  would  be  set  upon  by  rowdies;  a 
Republican  newspaper  in  Missouri  was  forcibly  suppressed; 
but  such  acts  were  fev^ 

Contemporaries  seemed  to  agree  in  the  judgment  that 
theTeampaign  was  not  exceedingly  exciting  and  they  were 
correspondingly  surprised.  The  New  York  World  deemed 
it  the  tamest  presidential  contest  since  the  second  election 

1  The  New  York  Herald,  November  5,  1860. 

2  The  Weekly  Illinois  State  Journal,  August  15,  1860. 


,     LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN        231 
A    w^V* 

of  Monroe;  the  New  York  Evening  Post  spoke  of  the  calm 
and  quiet  of  it ;  Greeley  declared  it  was  not  so  noisy  as  the 
campaigns  of  1840  and  1856.  Reasons  for  this  were  obvious. 
Enthusiasm  for  human  liberty,  which  in  1856  convulsed  the 
public  mind  and  turned  preachers  into  campaign  speakers, 
was  indeed  as  strong  as  ever,  but  with  the  assurance  of 
victory,  revolutionary  methods  to  arouse  the  public  mind 
were  no  longer  necessary.  So  truly  was  it  a  contest  of 
principle,  that  offensive  personalities,  which  usually  lead  to 
excitement,  were  comparatively  conspicuous  for  their  ab 
sence.  Harrison  was  attacked  as  a  coward  and  as  a  dotard, 
Clay  was  accused  of  every  crime  in  the  decalogue,  Pierce 
was  held  up  to  ridicule  as  a  white-livered  coward,  Scott  as  a 
poor  general,  cruel,  and  corrupt,  Fremont  as  guilty  of  every 
crime;  but  little  of  this  now  attached  to  Lincoln,  Douglas, 
Breckenridge,  or  Bell ;  indeed,  President  Buchanan's  char 
acter  was  blackened  more  than  that  of  any  of  the  candi 
dates.  The  factional  fight  of  the  Democrats  led  the  parti 
sans  of  that  party  to  train  on  one  another  the  guns  that 
otherwise  they  might  have  leveled  at  the  Republicans.1 
JTt  was  not  a  man- worshipping  struggle.  Probably  a  ma- 
jority  of  the  Republicans  wanted  another  candidate;  they 
loved  Lincoln  now,  but  they  had  learned  to  love  him  for  his 
principles  before  they  were  taught  to  love  him  for  himself. 
In  some  campaigns,  admiration  for  a  hero  had  been  the  guid 
ing  motive,  but  now  it  was  love  of  principle.  The  cam 
paign  had  not  been  waged  on  any  of  the  supposed  defects  of 
the  opposing  candidates  as  leading  issues.  The  Republicans 
could  say  to  all  the  candidates,  "We  have  done  you  no  harm 
before  the  people ;"  public  life  had  been  fought,  not  personal 
integrity  and  worth.  No  party  said,  "The  opposing  can 
didate  is  unworthy,  therefore  give  us  the  election. "j  Greeley 

1  The  New  York  Independent,  August  2,  1860 ;  the  New  York  World, 
August  12  and  23,  and  September  26,  1860;  the  New  York  Semi-Weekly 
Evening  Post,  August  1,  1860. 


232  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


\b 


i* 

believed  that  there  had  been  as  many  campaign  speeches  in 


1860  as  before  from  1789  to  1860.  It  was  preeminently  a 
campaign  of  education^  Many  men  spoke  every  day  for 
two  or  three  months  ;  ten  thousand  set  speeches  were  made 
for  Lincoln  in  New  York  State  alone,  fifty  thousand  through 
out  the  Union?)  There  was  a  very  general  enlistment  of  thei 
mercantile  or  capitalist  class  in  the  fusion  and  Democratic/ 
cause,  for  the  men  of  property  and  business  were  afraid  of 
disunion  and  of  the  financial  loss  that  it  might  entail.  This 
fear  grew  as  the  day  of  the  election  drew  near,  until  by 
November  6  all  the  conditions  were  prepared  for  the  sudden 
precipitation  of  a  financial  panic,  if  any  untoward  result  was 
declared  at  the  polls.  The  attitude  of  the  commercial  classes 
was  a  salient  feature  of  the  situation,  as  nothing  like  it  had 
existed  since  the  bank  contest  of  the  thirties.  [There  had 
been  more  exciting,  enthusiastic,  and  demonstrative  cam 
paigns,  but  none  in  which  a  larger  number  of  men  took  a 
more  sober  interest,  none  in  which  the  public  mind  was 
better  educated.O 

How  the  vote  would  go  never  once  seemed  in  doubt. 
Throughout,  the  Republicans  were  sanguine  of  success,  the 
Democrats  discouraged  and  expecting  defeat.  In  August 
early  fall  state  elections  took  place  in  North  Carolina, 
Arkansas,  Texas,  Missouri,  and  Kentucky,  unimportant 
except  as  indicating  the  bitterness  of  the  struggle  in  the 
slave  states  between  Bell  and  Breckenridge  ;  plainly  as 
the  campaign  progressed  the  Constitutional  Unionists  be 
came  stronger  and  stronger  in  the  South  and  would  push  the 
Breckenridge  Democracy  very  hard  in  the  final  contest. 
September  elections  in  Vermont  and  Maine  confirmed  the 
Republicans  in  their  hopes,  and  October  elections  in  Penn 
sylvania,  Ohio,  and  Indiana  sealed  everything  as  a  great 
and  sweeping  Republican  victory.  North  and  South  alike 
now  conceded  the  success  of  Lincoln.  At  Cedar  Rapids, 

1  The  New  York  Tribune,  November  8  and  9,  1860. 


LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN 

Iowa,  hearing  of  the  October  results,  Douglas  is  said  to  have 
remarked  to  his  secretary:  "Mr.  Lincoln  is  the  next  Presi 
dent^  We  must  try  to  save  the  Union.  I  will  go  South."  1 
JTLincoln  received  1,857,610  popular  votes,  Douglas 
1,365,967,  Breckenridge  847,953,  and  Bell  590,631 ;  in  the 
electoral  colleges  there  were  180  votes  for  Lincoln,  12  for 
Douglas,  39  for  Bell,  and  72  for  Breckenridge.  Fusion  was 
defeated  in  New  York  by  47,000,  in  Pennsylvania  by  75,000, 
and  in  Rhode  Island  by  5000;  in  New  Jersey,  where  the 
fusionists  won,  they  were  not  loyally  supported  by  the 
Douglasites,  so  that  the  result  there  was  three  electoral  votes 
for  Douglas  and  four  for  Lincoln.2  In  the  Southern  states 
Lincoln  received  17,000  votes  in  Missouri,  1300  in  Ken 
tucky,  3800  in  Delaware,  2300  in  Maryland,  and  1900  in 
Virginia,  not  a  vote  in  all  the  remainder  of  the  Southj  Al 
most  as  meager  was  the  Breckenridge  Northern  vote,  2400 
in  Illinois,  1000  in  Iowa,  900  in  Wisconsin,  12,000  in  Indiana, 
11,000  in  Ohio,  16,000  in  Connecticut,  6000  in  Massachu 
setts,  21,000  in  New  Hampshire,  6000  in  Maine,  and  200  in 
Vermont.  ^  Some  states  were  very  close.  Douglas  won 
Missouri  by  429  over  Bell,  Bell  Virginia  by  358  over  Breck 
enridge,  Breckenridge  Louisiana  by  2400  over  Bell,  Breck 
enridge  Maryland  by  700  over  Bell,  Lincoln  California  by 
650  over  Douglas,  and  Lincoln  Oregon  by  260  over  Breck 
enridge.  jt5Tthe  large  cities,  New  York  went  against  Lincoln 
for  fusion  by  30,000,  Philadelphia  for  Lincoln  by  1000,  Chi 
cago  for  Lincoln  by  5000,  and  St.  Louis  for  Lincoln  by  700.3 

1  The  History  of  the  Rise  and  Fall  of  the  Slave  Power  in  America,  by 
Henry  Wilson,  Boston,  1872-1877,  II,  699-700.     According  to  Wilson, 
Douglas  in  the  early  summer  in  New  York  conceded  Lincoln's  election 
privately  to  his  Republican  friends. 

2  That  is,  the  Douglasites  voted  for  their  own  three  men  on  the  fusion 
ticket,  but  refused  to  vote  for  the  four  representing  the  other  parties  to 
the  fusion ;  undoubtedly,  many  of  the  Douglas  men  scratched  the  names 
of  the  four  and  voted  rather  in  favor  of  the  Lincoln  electors. 

3  These  figures  are  taken  from  the  New  York  Tribune  Almanac. 


234  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

William  Cullen  Bryant,  poet  and  editor  of  the  New  York 
Evening  Post,  amid  maryelousenthusiasm  at  the  New  Y°rk 
jubilee  meeting,  celebrated"  tEe"  Republican  triumph  by  the 
following  notable  speech:  "My  friends,  great  motives  have 
called  us  together  this  evening.  We  are  assembled  to  cele 
brate  an  important  moral  and  political  victory,  one  of  the 
most  important,  it  seems  to  me,  that  has  ever  been  achieved. 
The  youngest  of  those  who  now  listen  to  me  may  live  to  the 
middle  of  the  next  century,  and  yet  never  witness  an  elec 
tion  so  pregnant  with  great  results  as  that  which  has  been 
held.  We  now  stand  upon  the  battlefield  of  the  great  con 
test,  while  around  us  and  before  us  lie  the  carcasses  of  the 
slain.  At  our  feet,  conquered,  lies  that_great_jgligarchy 
which  hasT  so  long' Held  the  South  through  submission  and 
fearZland.  Jias_rujed_the  iNorth  through  the  treachery  of 
Northern  menj  and  has  tyrannized  equally  over  both.  You, 
my  friends,  animated  by  the  generous  impulses  of  your  time 
of  life,  have  aided  to  deal  the  terrible  blow  that  has  stretched 
the  creature  on  the  earth.  It  lies  before  us,  horrible  and 
ghastly,  with  its  head  severed  from  its  huge  trunk,  and  with 
all  its  members  dissevered;  lifeless  and  dead  it  now  lies 
there,  and  from  that  death  there  is  no  resurrection.  _A  new_ 
era  is  now  inaugurated,  the  old  order  of  things  has  passed 
away,  never  T  wehope,  to  return.  A  new  order  of  things  is 
begun,  and  theFe  will  be  nomore  attempts  to  force  by  blood 
and  violence,  upon  the  peaceful  inhabitants  of  an  unoffend 
ing  territory,  a  barbarous  institution,  which  they  indig 
nantly  repel  and  utterly  abhor.  There  will  be  no  more 
attempts  to  wrest  from  their  owners  any  neighboring  terri 
tory  for  the  purpose  of  despotism,  and  no  more  attempts 
to  revive  that  thing,  accursed  of  God  and  man,  the  execrable 
slave  trade.  There  will  be  no  longer  any  daring  violations 
and  defiances  of  the  law  by  which  that  execrable  traffic  is 
prohibited.  There  will  be  no  more  attempts  to  purchase 
members  of  Congress,  and  buy  of  them  enactments  of  laws 


LEADERS  AND  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN        235 

which  their  own  consciences  disapprove.  For  the  part 
which  you  have  taken  in  the  inauguration  of  this  new  system 
your  own  conscience  must  applaud  you.  You  have  not  lis 
tened  to  the  mean  and  selfish  suggestions  of  interest,  or  to 
the  counsels  of  craven  and  abject  fear,  and  have  put  your 
hearts  into  the  contest  and  into  your  acts,  as  your  consciences 
have  dictated,  and  your  own  consciences  will  furnish  you  a 
sufficient  reward.  And  I  exhort  you,  whenever  you  are 
tempted  by  sordid  self-interest,  or  by  the  counsels  of  coward 
ice,  to  swerve  from  the  dictates  of  conscience  and  the  law  of 
duty,  to  remember  how  you  have  acted  on  this  occasion,  and 
let  that  remembrance  strengthen  and  confirm  your  virtue. 
I  have  been  long  an  observer  of  public  life,  but  never  in 
public  life ;  and  never  have  I  seen  any  course  of  right  steadily 
pursued  without  public  opinion  coming  round  to  that  course 
and  crowning  those  that  pursued  it  with  glory  and  triumph. 
This  cloud,  which  now  bursts  with  fertilizing  showers  over 
the  whole  land,  I  remember  many  years  since,  a  little  speck 
in  the  firmament,  no  bigger  than  a  man's  hand;  slowly  it 
enlarged  itself,  and  then  with  greater  rapidity,  until  it 
now  fills  the  whole  heaven,  shedding  down  abundance  over 
the  hills  and  thirsty  valleys,  till  the  dry  fields  are  filled  with 
abundant  moisture ;  and  you,  my  friends,  will  now  reap  the 
harvest  of  liberty  and  peace."  1 

1  The  New  York  Tribune,  November  9,  1860. 


APPENDIX  A 

THE   PARTY   PLATFORMS1 

# 

I.   REPUBLICAN  PLATFORM  £ 

" Resolved,  That  we,  the  delegated  representatives  of  the  Re 
publican  electors  of  the  United  States,  in  convention  assembled, 
in  discharge  of  the  duty  we  owe  to  our  constituents  and  our  coun 
try,  unite  in  the  following  declarations  :  — 

"1.  That  the  history  of  the  nation,  during  the  last  four  years, 
has  fully  established  the  propriety  and  necessity  of  the  organiza 
tion  and  perpetuation  of  the  Republican  party,  and  that  the 
causes  which  called  it  into  existence  are  permanent  in  their  nature, 
and  now,  more  than  ever  before,  demand  its  peaceful  and  constitu 
tional  triumph. 

"2.  That  the  maintenance  of  the  principles  promulgated  in  the 
Declaration  of  Independence  and  embodied  in  the  Federal  con 
stitution  — '  that  all  men  are  created  equal ;  that  they  are  endowed 
by  their  Creator  with  certain  unalienable  rights ;  that  among  these 
are  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness ;  that,  to  secure  these 
rights,  governments  are  instituted  among  men,  deriving  their 
just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed '-—  is  essential  to 
the  preservation  of  our  republican  institutions;  and  that  the 
Federal  constitution,  the  rights  of  the  states,  and  the  union  of  the 
states  must  and  shall  be  preserved. 

"3.  That  to  the  union  of  the  states  this  nation  owes  its  unpre 
cedented  increase  in  population,  its  surprising  development  of 
material  resources,  its  rapid  augmentation  of  wealth,  its  happiness 
at  home,  and  its  honor  abroad;  and  we  hold  in  abhorrence  all 
schemes  for  disunion,  come  from  whatever  source  they  may; 
and  we  congratulate  the  country  that  no  Republican  member  of 

1  These  platforms  are  taken  from  A  History  of  the  Presidency,  by  Edward  Stanwood, 
Boston  and  New  York,  1898. 

237 


238  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Congress  has  uttered  or  countenanced  the  threats  of  disunion 
so  often  made  by  Democratic  members,  without  rebuke  and  with 
applause  from  their  political  associates;  and  we  denounce  those 
threats  of  disunion,  in  case  of  a  popular  overthrow  of  their  ascen 
dency,  as  denying  the  vital  principles  of  a  free  government,  and 
as  an  avowal  of  contemplated  treason,  which  it  is  the  imperative 
duty  of  an  indignant  people  sternly  to  rebuke  and  forever  silence. 

"4.  That  the  maintenance  inviolate  of  the  rights  of  the  states, 
and  especially  the  right  of  each  state  to  order  and  control  its  own 
domestic  institutions  according  to  its  own  judgment  exclusively, 
is  essential  to  that  balance  of  power  on  which  the  perfection  and 
endurance  of  our  political  fabric  depends;  and  we  denounce  the 
lawless  invasion  by  armed  force  of  the  soil  of  any  state  or  territory, 
no  matter  under  what  pretext,  as  among  the  gravest  of  crimes. 

"5.  That  the  present  Democratic  administration  has  far  ex 
ceeded  our  worst  apprehensions,  in  its  measureless  subserviency 
to  the  exactions  of  a  sectional  interest,  as  especially  evinced  in  its 
desperate  exertions  to  force  the  infamous  Lecompton  constitution 
upon  the  protesting  people  of  Kansas ;  in  construing  the  personal 
relation  between  master  and  servant  to  involve  an  unqualified 
property  in  person ;  in  its  attempted  enforcement,  everywhere,  on 
land  and  sea,  through  the  intervention  of  Congress  and  of  the 
Federal  courts,  of  the  extreme  pretensions  of  a  purely  local  in 
terest;  and  in  its  general  and  unvarying  abuse  of  the  power 
intrusted  to  it  by  a  confiding  people. 

"6.  That  the  people  justly  view  with  alarm  the  reckless  ex 
travagance  which  pervades  every  department  of  the  Federal  gov 
ernment  ;  that  a  return  to  rigid  economy  and  accountability  is 
indispensable  to  arrest  the  systematic  plunder  of  the  public  treas 
ury  by  favored  partisans ;  while  the  recent  startling  developments 
of  fraud  and  corruptions  at  the  Federal  metropolis  show  that  an 
entire  change  of  administration  is  imperatively  demanded. 

"7.  That  the  dogma  that  the  constitution,  of  its  own  force, 
carries  slavery  into  any  or  all  of  the  territories  of  the  United  States, 
is  a  dangerous  political  heresy,  at  variance  with  the  explicit  pro 
visions  of  that  instrument  itself,  with  contemporaneous  exposition, 
and  with  legislative  and  judicial  precedent ;  is  revolutionary  in  its 
tendency,  and  subversive  of  the  peace  and  harmony  of  the  country. 


THE  PARTY  PLATFORMS  239 

"8.  That  the  normal  condition  of  all  the  territory  of  the  United 
States  is  that  of  freedom ;  that  as  our  Republican  fathers,  when 
they  had  abolished  slavery  in  all  our  national  territory,  ordained 
that  no  person  should  be  deprived  of  life,  liberty,  or  property 
without  due  process  of  law,  it  becomes  our  duty,  by  legislation, 
whenever  such  legislation  is  necessary,  to  maintain  this  provision 
of  the  constitution  against  all  attempts  to  violate  it ;  and  we  deny 
the  authority  of  Congress,  of  a  territorial  legislature,  or  of  any 
individual,  to  give  legal  existence  to  slavery  in  any  territory  of 
the  United  States. 

"9.  That  we  brand  the  recent  reopening  of  the  African  slave 
trade,  under  the  cover  of  the  national  flag,  aided  by  pervasions  of 
the  judicial  power,  as  a  crime  against  humanity,  and  a  burning 
shame  to  our  country  and  age ;  and  we  call  upon  Congress  to  take 
prompt  and  efficient  measures  for  the  total  and  final  suppression 
of  that  execrable  traffic. 

"  10.  That  in  the  recent  vetoes,  by  their  Federal  governors,  of 
the  acts  of  the  legislatures  of  Kansas  and  Nebraska,  prohibiting 
slavery  in  those  territories,  we  find  a  practical  illustration  of  the 
boasted  Democratic  principle  of  nonintervention  and  popular 
sovereignty,  embodied  in  the  Kansas-Nebraska  bill,  and  a  demon 
stration  of  the  deception  and  fraud  involved  therein. 

"11.  That  Kansas  should  of  right  be  immediately  admitted  as 
a  state  under  the  constitution  recently  formed  and  adopted  by 
her  people  and  accepted  by  the  House  of  Representatives. 

"12.  That,  while  providing  revenue  for  the  support  of  the 
general  government  by  duties  upon  imports,  sound  policy  requires 
such  an  adjustment  of  these  imposts  as  to  encourage  the  develop 
ment  of  the  industrial  interests  of  the  whole  country;  and  we 
commend  that  policy  of  national  exchanges  which  secures  to  the 
working  men  liberal  wages,  to  agriculture  remunerating  prices,  to 
mechanics  and  manufacturers  an  adequate  reward  for  their  skill, 
labor,  and  enterprise,  and  to  the  nation  commercial  prosperity  and 
independence. 

"13.  That  we  protest  against  any  sale  or  alienation  to  others 
of  the  public  lands  held  by  actual  settlers,  and  against  any  view 
of  the  free  homestead  policy  which  regards  the  settlers  as  paupers 
or  suppliants  for  public  bounty ;  and  we  demand  the  passage  by 


240  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Congress  of  the  complete  and  satisfactory  homestead  measure 
which  has  already  passed  the  house. 

"14.  That  the  Republican  party  is  opposed  to  any  change  in 
our  naturalization  laws,  or  any  state  legislation  by  which  the  rights 
of  citizenship  hitherto  accorded  to  immigrants  from  foreign  lands 
shall  be  abridged  or  impaired;  and  in  favor  of  giving  a  full  and 
efficient  protection  to  the  rights  of  all  classes  of  citizens,  whether 
native  or  naturalized,  both  at  home  and  abroad. 

"15.  That  appropriations  by  Congress  for  river  and  harbor 
improvements  of  a  national  character,  required  for  the  accommo 
dation  and  security  of  our  existing  commerce,  are  authorized  by 
the  constitution,  and  justified  by  the  obligations  of  government 
to  protect  the  lives  and  property  of  its  citizens. 

"16.  That  a  railroad  to  the  Pacific  Ocean  is  imperatively  de 
manded  by  the  interests  of  the  whole  country ;  that  the  Federal 
government  ought  to  render  immediate  and  efficient  aid  in  its 
construction  ;  and  that,  as  a  preliminary  thereto,  a  daily  overland 
mail  should  be  immediately  established. 

"17.  Finally,  having  thus  set  forth  our  distinctive  principles 
and  views,  we  invite  the  cooperation  of  all  citizens,  however  differ 
ing  on  other  questions,  who  substantially  agree  with  us  in  their 
affirmance  and  support." 

II.   DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM  (DOUGLAS) 

"1.  Resolved,  That  we,  the  Democracy  of  the  Union,  in  con 
vention  assembled,  hereby  declare  our  affirmance  of  the  resolu 
tions  unanimously  adopted  and  declared  as  a  platform  of  principles 
by  the  Democratic  convention  at  Cincinnati  in  the  year  1856, 
believing  that  Democratic  principles  are  unchangeable  in  their 
nature  when  applied  to  the  same  subject  matters ;  and  we  recom 
mend  as  the  only  further  resolutions  the  following :  — 

"Inasmuch  as  differences  of  opinion  exist  in  the  Democratic 
party  as  to  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  powers  of  a  territorial 
legislature,  and  as  to  the  powers  and  duties  of  Congress,  under  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  over  the  institution  of  slavery 
in  the  territories,  — 

"2.  Resolved,  That  the  Democratic  party  will  abide  by  the 


THE  PARTY  PLATFORMS  241 

decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  on  the  ques 
tions  of  constitutional  law. 

"3.  Resolved,  That  it  is  the  duty  of  the  United  States  to  afford 
ample  and  complete  protection  to  all  its  citizens,  whether  at  home 
or  abroad,  and  whether  native  or  foreign. 

"4.  Resolved,  That  one  of  the  necessities  of  the  age,  in  a  mili 
tary,  commercial,  and  postal  point  of  view,  is  speedy  communica 
tion  between  the  Atlantic  and  the  Pacific  states ;  and  the  Demo 
cratic  party  pledge  such  constitutional  government  aid  as  will 
insure  the  construction  of  a  railroad  to  the  Pacific  coast  at  the 
earliest  practicable  period. 

"5.  Resolved,  That  the  Democratic  party  are  in  favor  of  the 
acquisition  of  the  island  of  Cuba,  on  such  terms  as  shall  be  honor 
able  to  ourselves  and  just  to  Spain. 

"6.  Resolved,  That  the  enactments  of  state  legislatures  to  de 
feat  the  faithful  execution  of  the  fugitive  slave  law  are  hostile  in 
character,  subversive  of  the  Constitution,  and  revolutionary  in 
their  effects. 

"7.  (Added  at  the  Baltimore  convention.)  Resolved,  That  it  is 
in  accordance  with  the  interpretation  of  the  Cincinnati  platform 
that,  during  the  existence  of  the  territorial  governments,  the  meas 
ure  of  restriction,  whatever  it  may  be,  imposed  by  the  Federal 
Constitution  on  the  power  of  the  territorial  legislature  over  the 
subject  of  the  domestic  relations,  as  the  same  has  been,  or  shall 
hereafter  be,  finally  determined  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States,  should  be  respected  by  all  good  citizens,  and  en 
forced  with  promptness  and  fidelity  by  every  branch  of  the  Federal 
government." 

III.   DEMOCRATIC  PLATFORM  (BRECKENRIDGE) 

"  Resolved,  That  the  platform  adopted  by  the  Democratic  party 
at  Cincinnati  be  affirmed,  with  the  following  explanatory  resolu 
tions  :  — 

"1.  That  the  government  of  a  territory  organized  by  an  act  of 
Congress  is  provisional  and  temporary ;  and,  during  its  existence, 
all  citizens  of  the  United  States  have  an  equal  right  to  settle  with 
their  property  in  the  territory,  without  their  rights,  either  of  person 


242  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

or  of  property,  being  destroyed  or  impaired  by  congressional 
legislation. 

"2.  That  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Federal  government,  in  all  its 
departments,  to  protect,  when  necessary,  the  rights  of  persons  and 
property  in  the  territories,  and  wherever  else  its  constitutional 
authority  extends. 

"3.  That  when  the  settlers  in  a  territory,  having  an  adequate 
population,  form  a  state  constitution,  the  right  of  sovereignty 
commences,  and,  being  consummated  by  admission  into  the 
Union,  they  stand  on  an  equal  footing  with  the  people  of  the  other 
states;  and  the  state  thus  organized  ought  to  be  admitted  into 
the  Federal  Union,  whether  its  constitution  prohibits  or  recog 
nizes  the  institution  of  slavery. 

"A.  That  the  Democratic  party  are  in  favor  of  the  acquisition 
of  the  island  of  Cuba,  on  such  terms  as  shall  be  honorable  to  our 
selves  and  just  to  Spain,  at  the  earliest  practicable  moment. 

"5.  That  the  enactments  of  state  legislatures  to  defeat  the 
faithful  execution  of  the  fugitive  slave  law  are  hostile  in  character, 
subversive  of  the  constitution,  and  revolutionary  in  effect. 

"6.  That  the  Democracy  of  the  United  States  recognize  it  as 
the  imperative  duty  of  this  government  to  protect  the  naturalized 
citizen  in  all  his  rights,  whether  at  home  or  in  foreign  lands,  to 
the  same  extent  as  its  native-born  citizens. 

"Whereas,  one  of  the  greatest  necessities  of  the  age,  in  a  political 
commercial,  postal,  and  military  point  of  view,  is  a  speedy  com 
munication  between  the  Pacific  and  Atlantic  coasts, 

"Therefore  be  it  resolved,  That  the  Democratic  party  do  hereby 
pledge  themselves  to  use  every  means  in  their  power  to  secure  the 
passage  of  some  bills,  to  the  extent  of  the  constitutional  authority 
of  Congress,  for  the  construction  of  a  Pacific  railroad  from  the 
Mississippi  River  to  the  Pacific  Ocean,  at  the  earliest  practicable 
moment." 

IV.   CONSTITUTIONAL  UNION  PLATFORM 

"Whereas,  Experience  has  demonstrated  that  platforms  adopted 
by  the  partisan  conventions  of  the  country  have  had  the  effect  to 
mislead  and  deceive  the  people,  and  at  the  same  time  to  widen  the 


THE  PARTY  PLATFORMS  243 

political  divisions  of  the  country  by  the  creation  and  encourage 
ment  of  geographical  and  sectional  parties,  therefore,  — 

"Resolved,  That  it  is  both  the  part  of  patriotism  and  of  duty 
to  recognize  no  political  principle  other  than  the  Constitution  of 
the  country,  the  union  of  the  states,  and  the  enforcement  of  the 
laws,  and  that,  as  representatives  of  the  constitutional  Union  men 
of  the  country  in  national  convention  assembled,  we  hereby 
pledge  ourselves  to  maintain,  protect,  and  defend,  separately 
and  unitedly,  these  great  principles  of  public  liberty  and  national 
safety,  against  all  enemies  at  home  and  abroad,  believing  that 
thereby  peace  may  once  more  be  restored  to  the  country,  the  rights 
of  the  people,  and  of  the  states  reestablished,  and  the  govern 
ment  again  placed  in  that  condition  of  justice,  fraternity,  and 
equality^ which,  under  the  example  and  Constitution  of  our  fathers, 
has  solemnly  bound  every  citizen  of  the  United  States  to  main 
tain  a  more  perfect  union,  establish  justice,  insure  domestic  tran 
quillity,  provide  for  the  common  defense,  promote  the  general 
welfare,  and  secure  the  blessings  of  liberty  to  ourselves  and  our 
posterity." 


APPENDIX  B 

REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ,  ST.  LOUIS, 
MISSOURI,    AUGUST    1,    I8601 

"MR.  PRESIDENT  AND  GENTLEMEN:  To  deny  the  existence  of 
an  evil  they  do  not  mean  to  remedy,  to  ascribe  to  paltry  causes  the 
origin  of  great  problems  they  do  not  mean  to  solve,  to  charge  those 
who  define  the  nature  of  an  existing  evil,  with  having  originated 
it,  these  are  expedients  which  the  opponents  of  reformatory  move 
ments  have  resorted  to  since  mankind  has  a  history.  An  appeal 
to  ignorance  or  timidity  is  their  last  hope,  when  all  resources  of 
logic  and  argument  are  exhausted.  The  old  comedy  is  repeated 
again  and  again. 

"The  assertions  that  the  great  contest  between  free  and  slave 
labor  has  no  foundation  in  fact,  that  the  origin  of  the  slavery 
controversy  is  to  be  found  in  the  fanaticism  of  a  few  Northern 
abolitionists,  and  that  those  who  speak  of  an  'irrepressible  conflict' 
are  to  be  made  responsible  for  its  existence,  these  form  the  argu 
mentative  staple  of  those  who  possess  either  not  sagacity  enough 
to  discern,  or  not  courage  enough  to  state  facts  as  they  are. 

"In  investigating  the  causes  of  the  great  struggle  which  has  for 
years  kept  the  minds  of  the  people  in  constant  uneasiness  and 
excitement,  I  shall  endeavor  to  act  with  the  most  perfect  fairness. 
I  will  not  indulge  in  any  denunciations.  I  shall  impeach  the 
motives  of  no  one.  I  shall  not  appeal  to  prejudice  or  passion. 
I  invite  you  to  pass  in  review  the  actual  state  of  things  with  calm 
ness  and  impartiality. 

"It  is  one  of  the  best  traits  of  human  nature  that  we  form  our 
first  opinions  on  matters  of  general  interest  from  our  innate  sense 
of  right  and  wrong.  Our  moral  impressions,  the  dictates  of  our 
consciences,  the  generous  impulses  of  our  hearts,  are  the  sources 

'From  a  contemporary  pamphlet;   Yale  University  Political  Pamphlets,  Vol.  17. 

244 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  245 

from  which  our  first  convictions  spring.  But  custom,  material 
interest,  and  our  natural  inclination  to  acquiesce  in  that  which 
is,  whether  right  or  wrong,  that  vis  inertias  which  has  brought  so 
much  suffering  upon  humanity,  are  apt  to  overrule  the  native 
instincts  of  our  moral  nature.  They  are  sicklied  over  by  the  pale 
cast  of  calculation ;  the  freshness  of  their  impelling  power  is  lost, 
and  questions  essentially  moral  are  imperceptibly  changed  into 
questions  of  material  interest,  national  economy,  or  political 
power. 

"The  people  of  the  South  have  evidently  gone  through  that 
process  in  regard  to  the  institution  of  slavery ;  they  have  become 
accustomed  to  identify  its  existence  with  the  existence  of  South 
ern  society,  while  even  a  large  majority  of  the  people  of  the  North 
were  rather  inclined  to  silence  their  moral  objections  to  it,  and  to 
acquiesce,  until  its  immediate  interference  with  matters  of  general 
interest  gave  a  new  impulse  to  their  native  antipathy.  Although 
I  am  not  ashamed  to  confess,  that  the  moral  merits  of  the  ques 
tion  would  alone  have  been  more  than  sufficient  to  make  me  an 
antislavery  man,  yet  I  will  confine  myself  to  a  discussion  of  its 
practical  effects,  in  order  to  make  myself  intelligible  even  to  those 
who  do  not  sympathize  with  me.  This  is  the  first  time  that  I 
have  had  the  honor  to  address  a  meeting  in  a  slave  state,  and  even 
now  I  owe  the  privilege  of  expressing  my  opinions  freely  and  with 
out  restraint  to  the  circumstance  that,  although  in  a  slave  state, 
I  stand  upon  the  soil  of  a  free  city,  and  under  the  generous  pro 
tection  of  free  men.  (Applause.)  Must  I  call  a  privilege  what 
ought  to  be  universally  respected  as  the  sacred  birthright  of  every 
American  citizen?  Ask  any  slaveholder  who  may  be  present 
in  this  vast  assembly  whether  he  does  not  deem  it  wrong  and 
unjustifiable  that  I,  an  antislavery  man,  should  be  permitted  to 
give  a  public  expression  of  my  views  in  a  slave  state?  whether 
he  would  not  be  in  favor  of  silencing  me  by  whatever  means 
within  his  reach  ?  whether  I  would  not  be  silenced  at  once  in  a 
strong  slaveholding  community?  I  do  not  mean  to  blame  him 
for  it.  Let  us  give  him  a  fair  hearing.  The  slaveholder  will 
state  his  political  views  substantially  as  follows :  '  On  the  point 
of  astronomy,  or  chemistry,  or  medicine,  you  may  entertain  what 
ever  opinion  you  please;  but  we  cannot  permit  you  to  discuss  the 


246  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMBAIGN 

relation  of  master  and  servant,  as  it  exists  here  in  the  slave  state, 
for  in  doing  so  you  would  endanger  our  safety  and  under  our 
social  system.  Our  condition  is  such  that  the  slightest  movement 
of  insubordination  once  started,  is  apt  to  grow  with  uncontrollable 
rapidity;  we  have,  therefore,  to  guard  against  everything  that 
may  start  it ;  we  cannot  allow  free  discussion  of  the  subject ;  we 
have  to  remove  from  our  midst  every  incendiary  element;  we 
cannot  be  expected  to  tolerate  opinions  of  persons  among  us  that 
are  opposed  to  the  ruling  order  of  things.  Whenever  a  mis 
chievous  attempt  is  made,  we  are  obliged  to  repress  it  with 
such  energy  and  severity  as  to  strike  terror  into  the  hearts 
of  those  who  might  be  capable  of  repeating  the  attempt.  Our 
condition  requires  the  promptest  action,  and  if,  in  cases  of  immi 
nent  danger,  the  regular  process  of  the  courts  is  too  slow  or  uncer 
tain,  we  are  obliged  to  resort  to  lynch  law  in  order  to  supply  its 
deficiencies. 

"'Moreover,  we  must  adapt  our  rules  and  customs  of  govern 
ment  to  the  peculiar  wants  of  our  social  organization.  In  order 
to  be  safe,  we  must  intrust  the  government  in  its  general  admin 
istration  as  well  as  in  details  to  those  who,  by  their  own  interests, 
are  bound  to  be  the  natural  guardians  of  the  system.  Hence  our 
safety  requires  that  the  political  power  in  our  states  should  be 
put  into  the  hands  of  the  slaveholders ;  and  where  we  have  no  law 
to  that  effect,  custom  upholds  the  rule. 

"'In  order  to  put  the  political  ascendency  of  those  who  are 
most  interested  in  the  preservation  of  slavery  upon  a  solid  basis, 
we  must  put  down  everything  that  would  produce  and  foster  inde 
pendent  aspirations  among  the  other  classes  of  society.  It  would 
not  only  be  insane  to  educate  the  slaves,  but  highly  dangerous  to 
extend  to  the  great  mass  of  poor  white  nonslaveholders  the  means 
of  education;  for  in  doing  so  we  might  raise  an  element  to  in 
fluence  and  power  whose  interests  are  not  identical  with  those  of 
the  slaveholder.  This  is  our  policy  of  self-preservation,  and  we 
are  bound  to  enforce  it.' 

"Sir,  I  mean  to  be  just  to  the  slaveholders,  and,  strange  as  it 
may  sound,  as  to  the  propriety  of  their  policy,  I  agree  with  them. 
Having  identified  their  social  existence  with  the  existence  of 
slavery,  they  cannot  act  otherwise. 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  247 

"It  is  necessity  that  urges  them  on.  It  is  true  that  slavery  is 
an  inflammable  element.  A  stray  spark  of  thought  or  hope  may 
cause  a  terrible  conflagration.  The  torch  of  free  speech  or  press, 
which  gives  light  to  the  house  of  liberty,  is  very  apt  to  set  on  fire 
the  house  of  slavery.  What  is  more  natural  than  that  the  torch 
should  be  extinguished,  where  there  is  such  an  abundance  of  ex 
plosive  material  ? 

"It  is  true,  that  in  a  slaveholding  community  the  strictest 
subordination  must  be  enforced,  that  the  maintenance  of  estab 
lished  order  requires  the  most  rigorous,  preventive,  and  repressive 
measures,  which  will  not  always  allow  of  the  strict  observance  of 
the  rules  of  legal  process ;  it  is  equally  true  that  the  making  and 
the  execution  of  the  laws  can  be  safely  intrusted  to  those  who, 
by  their  position,  are  bound  to  the  ruling  interest ;  true  that  popu 
lar  education  is  dangerous  to  the  rule  of  an  exclusive  class ;  true 
that  men  must  be  kept  stupid  to  be  kept  obedient.  What  is  more 
consistent,  therefore,  than  that  the  fundamental  liberties  should 
be  disregarded  whenever  they  become  dangerous ;  that  the  safe 
guards  of  human  rights  in  the  administration  should  be  set  aside 
whenever  the  emergency  calls  for  prompt  and  energetic  action; 
that  the  masses  should  be  left  uneducated,  in  order  to  give  the 
slaveholding  oligarchy  an  undisputed  sway?  In  one  word,  that 
the  rights,  the  liberties,  and  the  security  of  the  individual  should 
have  to  yield  to  the  paramount  considerations  of  the  safety  of 
the  ruling  interest  ?  All  this  is  true ;  and  accepting  the  premises, 
all  these  necessities  exist.  You  seem  startled  at  this  proposition 
and  ask,  what  is  the  institution  that  demands  for  its  protection 
such  measures?  The  slave  states  are  by  no  means  original  in 
this  respect.  Look  at  the  kingdom  of  Naples,  where  the  ruling 
power  is  governed  by  similar  exclusive  interests,  and  acts  on  the 
same  instinct  of  self-preservation ;  does  it  not  resort  to  the  same 
means?  You  tell  me  that  the  principles  underlying  our  system 
of  government  are  very  different  from  those  of  the  kingdom  of 
Naples,  and  that  the  means  of  protection  I  spoke  of  run  contrary 
to  the  spirit  of  our  institutions.  Indeed,  so  it  seems  to  me.  What 
does  that  prove  ?  Simply  this :  That  a  social  system  which  is 
in  antagonism  with  the  principles  of  democratic  government,  can 
not  be  maintained  and  protected  by  means  which  are  in  accord- 


248  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

ance  with  those  principles ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  that  a  social 
system  that  cannot  be  protected  by  means  that  are  in  accordance 
with  the  democratic  principles  of  our  government,  must  essen 
tially  be  in  antagonism  to  those  principles.  It  proves  that  the 
people  in  the  slaveholding  states,  although  pretending  to  be  free 
men,  are,  by  the  necessities  arising  from  their  condition,  the  slaves 
of  slavery.  That  is  all. 

"  But  I  am  told  that  the  slave  states  are  sovereign,  and  may 
shape  and  govern  their  home  concerns  according  to  their  own 
notions,  subject  only  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 
Granted.  But  the  necessities  of  slavery  do  not  stop  there.  The 
slave  states  are  members  of  a  Federal  family,  and  as  the  King 
of  Naples  in  his  foreign  policy  is  governed  by  his  peculiar  interests, 
so  is  the  policy  of  the  slave  states  in  our  Federal  affairs  governed 
by  their  peculiar  necessities. 

"I  hear  much  said  of  the  aggressive  spirit  of  the  slave  power, 
but  I  am  inclined  to  acquit  it  of  that  charge,  for  all  its  apparently 
aggressive  attempts  are  no  less  dictated  by  the  instinct  of  self- 
preservation,  than  the  most  striking  features  of  its  home  policy. 

"Let  us  listen  to  the  slaveholder  again.  He  says:  'What  will 
become  of  the  security  of  our  slave  property,  if  inside  of  this  union 
a  slave  may  finally  escape  from  the  hands  of  his  master,  by  simply 
crossing  the  line  of  his  state?  But  the  fanatical  antislavery 
spirit  prevailing  in  the  free  states,  will  avail  itself  of  every  facility 
the  common  legal  process  affords,  as  the  trial  by  jury  and  the  writ 
of  habeas  corpus,  to  aid  the  fugitive  in  his  escape.  We  are,  there 
fore,  obliged  to  demand  such  legislation  at  the  hands  of  the  general 
government,  as  will  remove  these  obstacles  thrown  in  the  way  of 
the  recapture  of  our  property,  and  oblige  the  citizens,  by  law,  to 
assist  us  in  the  re-apprehension  of  the  fugitive,  so  the  trial  by  jury 
and  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  will  have  to  yield,  and  the  good  old 
common  law  principle,  that  in  all  cases  concerning  life  and  property 
the  presumption  be  in  favor  of  liberty,  goes  by  the  board.  This 
may  seem  rather  hard,  but  is  it  not  eminently  consistent  ? ' 

"The  necessities  of  slavery  do  not  stop  there.  Let  us  hear  how 
the  slaveholder  proceeds.  '  In  order  to  obtain  such  legislation  from 
our  national  councils,  it  is  necessary  that  the  prejudices  against 
slavery  existing  in  the  free  states  be  disarmed.  It  is  impossible 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  249 

that  the  slave  interest  deem  itself  secure  as  long  as  a  violent  agita 
tion  is  kept  up  against  it,  which  continually  troubles  us  at  home, 
and  exercises  upon  the  national  legislature  an  influence  hostile 
to  slavery.  We  are,  therefore,  obliged  to  demand  that  measures 
fte  taken  to  stop  that  agitation/  Nothing  more  natural  than  that. 
The  right  of  petition,  held  sacred  even  by  some  despotic  govern 
ments,  must  be  curtailed.  Post  office  regulations  must  prevent 
the  dissemination  of  antislavery  sentiments  by  the  newspapers. 
Even  in  the  free  states  willing  instruments  are  found,  who  urge 
the  adoption  of  measures  tending  to  suppress  the  very  discussion 
of  this  question.  Laws  are  advocated  in  Congress  (and  that 
' champion  of  free  labor'  Douglas,  takes  the  lead),  making  it  a 
criminal  offense  to  organize  associations  hostile  to  slavery,  and 
empowering  the  general  government  to  suppress  them  by  means  of 
a  centralized  police.  (Loud  cheers.)  This  may  seem  somewhat 
tyrannical,  but  is  it  not  eminently  consistent?  (Applause.) 

''But  in  order  to  succeed  in  this,  slavery  needs  a  controlling 
power  in  the  general  government.  It  cannot  expect  to  persuade 
us,  so  it  must  try  to  subdue  and  rule  us.  Hear  the  slaveholder : 
'It  is  impossible  that  we  should  consider  our  interests  safe  in  this 
union,  unless  the  political  equilibrium  between  the  free  and  the 
slave  states  be  restored.  If  the  free  states  are  permitted  to  grow 
and  the  slave  states  stand  still,  we  shall  be  completely  at  the 
mercy  of  a  hostile  majority.  We  are,  therefore,  obliged  to  de 
mand  accessions  of  territory  out  of  which  new  slave  states  can  be 
formed,  so  as  to  increase  our  representation  in  Congress,  and  to 
restore  the  equilibrium  of  power.'  Nothing  more  sensible.  The 
acquisition  of  foreign  countries,  such  as  Cuba  and  the  Northern 
states  of  Mexico,  is  demanded ;  and,  if  they  cannot  be  obtained 
by  fair  purchase  and  diplomatic  transaction,  war  must  be  resorted 
to ;  and,  if  the  majority  of  the  people  are  not  inclined  to  go  to  war, 
our  international  relations  must  be  disturbed  by  filibustering 
expeditions,  precipitating,  if  possible,  this  country  into  wars, 
thus  forcing  the  peaceable  or  cheating  the  enthusiastic  into  sub 
serviency  to  the  plans  of  the  slave  power.  You  may  call  this 
piracy,  disgracing  us  in  the  eyes  of  the  civilized  world.  But  can 
you  deny  that  slavery  needs  power,  and  that  it  cannot  obtain 
that  power  except  by  extension? 


250  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

"So,  pressed  by  its  necessities,  it  lays  its  hand  upon  our  national 
territories.  Time-honored  compacts,  hemming  in  slavery,  must 
be  abrogated.  The  Constitution  must  be  so  construed  as  to  give 
slavery  unlimited  sway  over  our  national  domain.  Hence  your 
Nebraska  bills  and  Dred  Scott  decisions,  and  slave  code  platforms. 
You  may  call  that  atrocious,  but  can  you  deny  its  consistency  ? 

"'But/  adds  the  slaveholder,  'of  what  use  to  us  is  the  abstract 
right  to  go  with  our  slave  property  into  the  territories,  if  you 
pass  laws  which  attract  to  the  territories  a  class  of  population  that 
will  crowd  out  slavery  ?  if  you  attract  to  them  the  foreign  im 
migrant  by  granting  to  him  the  immediate  enjoyment  of  political 
rights?  if  you  allure  the  paupers  from  all  parts  of  the  globe  by 
your  preemption  laws  and  homestead  bills  ?  We  want  the  negro 
in  the  territories.  You  give  us  the  foreign  immigrant.  Slavery 
cannot  exist  except  with  the  system  of  large  farms,  and  your  home 
stead  bills  establish  the  system  of  small  farms,  with  which  free 
labor  is  inseparably  connected.  We  are,  therefore,  obliged  to 
demand  that  all  such  mischievous  projects  be  abandoned.1  Noth 
ing  more  plausible.  Hence  the  right  of  the  laboring  man  to  ac 
quire  property  in  the  soil  by  his  labor  is  denied ;  your  homestead 
bills  voted  down;  the  blight  of  oppressive  speculation  fastened 
on  your  virgin  soil,  and  attempts  are  made  to  deprive  the  foreign 
immigrant  in  the  territories  of  the  immediate  enjoyment  of  political 
rights,  which  in  the  primitive  state  of  social  organization  are  essen 
tial  to  his  existence.  All  this  in  order  to  give  slavery  a  chance  to 
obtain  possession  of  our  national  domain.  This  may  seem  rather 
hard.  But  can  you  deny  that  slavery  for  its  own  protection  needs 
power  in  the  general  government?  and  that  it  cannot  obtain 
that  power  except  by  increased  representation  ?  and  that  it  cannot 
increase  its  representation  except  by  conquest  and  extension  over 
the  territories  ?  and  that  with  this  policy  all  measures  are  incom 
patible,  which  bid  fair  to  place  the  territories  into  the  hands  of 
free  labor? 

"This  is  not  all.  Listen  to  the  slaveholder  once  more:  'Our 
states,'  he  tells  us,  'are  essentially  agricultural  producing  states. 
We  have  but  little  commerce,  and  still  less  manufacturing  industry. 
All  legislation  tending  to  benefit  the  commercial  and  manufacturing 
interests  principally,  is  therefore  to  our  immediate  prejudice.  It 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  251 

will  oblige  us  to  contribute  to  the  growth  and  prosperity  of  the 
free  states  at  our  expense,  and  consequently  turn  the  balance  of 
political  power  still  more  against  us.  We  are,  therefore,  obliged 
to  demand  that  all  attempts  to  promote,  by  Federal  legislation, 
the  industrial  interest,  be  given  up.'  Nothing  more  logical.  The 
system  of  slave  labor  has  never  permitted  them  to  recognize  and 
develop  the  harmony  of  agricultural,  commercial,  and  industrial 
pursuits.  What  is  more  natural  than  that  they  should  seek  to 
give  the  peculiar  economic  interest  in  which  their  superiority  con 
sists,  the  preponderance  in  our  economical  policy?  Hence  their 
unrelenting  opposition  to  all  legislation  tending  to  develop  the 
peculiar  resources  of  the  free  states. 

"Here  let  us  pause.  Is  there  nothing  strange  or  surprising  in 
all  this  ?  You  may  call  it  madness,  but  there  is  method  in  this 
madness.  The  slave  power  is  impelled  by  the  irresistible  power 
of  necessity.  It  cannot  exist  unless  it  rules,  and  it  cannot  rule 
unless  it  keeps  down  its  opponents.  All  its  demands  and  arts  are 
in  strict  harmony  with  its  interests  and  attributes ;  they  are  the 
natural  growth  of  its  existence.  I  repeat,  I  am  willing  to  acquit 
it  of  the  charge  of  wilful  aggression ;  I  am  willing  to  concede  that 
it  struggles  for  self-preservation ;  but  now  the  momentous  ques 
tion  arises,  how  do  the  means  which  seem  indispensible  to  the  self- 
preservation  of  slavery  agree  with  the  existence  and  interests  of 
free  labor  society? 

"Sir,  if  Mr.  Hammond  of  South  Carolina,  or  Mr.  Brown  of 
Mississippi,  had  listened  to  me,  would  they  not  have  been  obliged 
to  give  me  credit  for  having  stated  their  case  fairly  ?  Now,  listen 
to  me  while  I  state  our  own. 

"Cast  your  eyes  over  that  great  beehive,  called  the  free  states. 
See  by  the  railroad  and  the  telegraphic  wire  every  village,  almost 
every  backwoods  cottage,  drawn  within  the  immediate  reach  of 
progressive  civilization.  Look  over  our  grain  fields,  but  lately  a 
lonesome  wilderness,  where  machinery  is  almost  superseding  the 
labor  of  the  human  hand;  over  our  workshops  whose  aspect  is 
almost  daily  changed  by  the  magic  touch  of  inventive  genius; 
over  our  fleets  of  merchant  vessels,  numerous  enough  to  make  the 
whole  world  tributary  to  our  prosperity;  look  upon  our  society 
where  by  popular  education  and  the  continual  change  of  condition 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

lividing  lines  between  ranks  and  classes,  are  almost  obliterated ; 
look  upon  our  system  of  public  instruction,  which  places  even  the 
lowliest  child  of  the  people  upon  the  high  road  of  progressive 
advancement ;  upon  our  rapid  growth  and  expansive  prosperity, 
which  is  indeed  subject  to  reverses  and  checks,  but  contains  such 
a  wonderful  fertility  of  resource,  that  every  check  is  a  mere  incen 
tive  to  new  enterprise,  every  reverse  but  a  mere  opportunity  for 
the  development  of  new  powers. 

"To  what  do  we  owe  all  this  ?  First  and  foremost,  to  that  per 
fect  freedom  of  inquiry,  which  acknowledges  no  rules  but  those 
of  logic,  no  limits  but  those  that  bound  the  faculties  of  the  human 
mind.  (Cheers.)  Its  magic  consists  in  its  universality.  To  it 
we  owe  the  harmony  of  our  progressive  movement  in  all  its  endless 
ramifications.  No  single  science,  no  single  practical  pursuit  exists 
in  our  day  independently  of  all  other  sciences,  all  other  practical 
pursuits.  This  is  the  age  of  the  solidarity  of  progress.  Set  a 
limit  to  the  freedom  of  inquiry  in  one  direction  and  you  destroy 
the  harmony  of  its  progressive  action.  Give  us  the  Roman  in 
quisition,  which  forbids  Galileo  Galites  to  think  that  the  earth 
moves  around  the  sun,  and  he  has  to  interrupt  and  give  up  the 
splendid  train  of  his  discoveries  and  their  influence  upon  all  other 
branches  of  science  is  lost ;  he  has  to  give  it  up,  or  he  must  fight 
the  inquisition.  (Cheers.)  Let  the  slave  power  or  any  other 
political  or  economic  interest  tell  us  that  we  must  think,  and 
say,  and  invent,  and  discover  nothing  which  is  against  its  demands, 
and  we  must  interrupt  and  give  up  the  harmony  of  our  progressive 
development,  or  fight  the  tyrannical  pretension,  whatever  shape  it 
may  assume.  (Loud  cheers.) 

"Believing  as  we  do,  that  the  moral  and  ideal  development  of 
man  is  the  true  end  and  aim  of  human  society,  we  must  preserve 
in  their  efficiency  the  means  which  serve  that  end.  In  order  to 
secure  to  the  freedom  of  inquiry  its  full  productive  power,  we  must 
surround  it  with  all  the  safeguards  which  political  institutions 
afford.  As  we  cannot  set  a  limit  to  the  activity  of  our  minds,  so 
we  cannot  muzzle  our  mouths  or  fetter  the  press  with  a  censor 
ship.  (Applause.)  We  cannot  arrest  or  restrain  the  discussion  of 
the  question,  what  system  of  labor  or  what  organization  of  society 
promotes  best  the  moral  and  intellectual  development  of  man. 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  253 

(Loud  applause.)  We  cannot  deprive  a  single  individual  of  the 
privileges  which  protect  him  in  the  free  exercise  of  his  faculties, 
and  the  enjoyment  of  his  right,  so  long  as  these  faculties  are  not 
employed  to  the  detriment  of  the  rights  and  liberties  of  others. 
Our  organization  of  society  resting  upon  equal  rights,  we  find 
our  security  in  a  general  system  of  popular  education  which  fits 
all  for  an  intelligent  exercise  of  those  rights.  This  is  the  home 
policy  of  free  society.  This  policy  in  our  Federal  affairs  must 
necessarily  correspond.  Deeming  free  and  intelligent  labor  the 
only  safe  basis  of  society,  it  is  our  duty  to  expand  its  blessings 
over  all  the  territory  within  our  reach ;  seeing  our  own  prosperity 
advanced  by  the  prosperity  of  our  neighbors,  we  must  endeavor 
to  plant  upon  our  borders  a  system  of  labor  which  answers  in  that 
respect.  Do  we  recognize  the  right  of  the  laboring  man  to  the  soil 
he  cultivates  and  shield  him  against  oppressive  speculation? 
Seeing  in  the  harmonious  development  of  all  branches  of  labor  a 
source  of  progress  and  power,  we  must  adopt  a  policy  which  draws 
to  light  the  resources  of  the  land,  gives  work  to  our  workshops 
and  security  to  our  commerce.  These  are  the  principles  and  views 
governing  our  policy. 

"Slaveholders,  look  at  this  picture  and  at  this.  Can  the  differ 
ence  escape  your  observation  ?  You  may  say,  as  many  have  said, 
that  there  is  a  difference  of  principle,  but  not  necessarily  an  an 
tagonism  of  interests.  Look  again. 

"Your  social  system  is  founded  upon  forced  labor,  ours  upon  j 
free  labor.  Slave  labor  cannot  exist  together  with  freedom  of  , 
inquiry,  and  so  you  demand  the  restriction  of  that  freedom ;  free  j 
labor  cannot  exist  without  it,  and  so  we  maintain  its  inviolabilit; 
Slave  labor  demands  the  setting  aside  of  the  safeguards  of  individ 
ual  liberty,  for  the  purpose  of  upholding  subordination  and  pro 
tecting  slave  property ;  free  labor  demands  their  preservation  as 
essential  and  indispensible  to  its  existence  and  progressive  develop 
ment.  Slavery  demands  extension  by  an  aggressive  foreign  pol 
icy;  free  labor  demands  an  honorable  peace  and  friendly  inter 
course  with  the  world  abroad  for  its  commerce,  and  a  peaceable 
and  undisturbed  development  of  our  resources  at  home  for  its 
agriculture  and  industry.  Slavery  demands  extension  over  na 
tional  territories  for  the  purpose  of  gaining  political  power. 


254  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Free  labor  demands  the  national  domain  for  workingmen,  for 
the  purpose  of  spreading  the  blessings  of  liberty  and  civilization. 
Slavery,  therefore,  opposes  all  measures  tending  to  secure  the  soil 
to  the  actual  laborer ;  free  labor,  therefore,  recognizes  the  right 
of  the  settler  to  the  soil,  and  demands  measures  protecting  him 
against  the  pressure  of  speculation.  Slavery  demands  the  abso 
lute  ascendency  of  the  planting  interest  in  our  economical  policy ; 
free  labor  demands  legislation  tending  to  develop  all  the  resources 
of  the  land,  and  to  harmonize  the  agricultural,  commercial,  and 
industrial  interests.  Slavery  demands  the  control  of  the  general 
government  for  its  special  protection  and  the  promotion  of  its 
peculiar  interests ;  free  labor  demands  that  the  general  govern 
ment  be  administered  for  the  purpose  of  securing  to  all  the 
blessings  of  liberty,  and  for  the  promotion  of  the  general  welfare. 
(Great  applause.)  Slavery  demands  the  recognition  of  its  divine 
right ;  free  labor  recognizes  no  divine  right  but  that  of  the  liberty 
of  all  men.  (Loud  cheers.) 

"With  one  word,  slavery  demands,  for  its  protection  and  per 
petuation,  a  system  of  policy  which  is  utterly  incompatible  with 
the  principles  upon  which  the  organization  of  free  labor  society 
rests.  There  is  the  antagonism.  There  is  the  essence  of  the 
1  irrepressible  conflict.'  It  is  a  conflict  of  principles  underlying 
interests,  always  the  same,  whether  appearing  as  a  moral,  economic, 
or  political  question.  Mr.  Douglas  boasted  that  he  could  repress 
it  with  police  measures ;  he  might  as  well  try  to  fetter  the  winds 
with  a  rope.  The  South  means  to  repress  it  with  decisions  of  the 
Supreme  Court;  they  might  as  well,  like  Xerxes,  try  to  subdue  the 
waves  of  the  ocean  by  throwing  chains  into  the  water.  (Applause.) 

"The  conflict  of  constitutional  construction  is  indeed  a  mere 
incident  of  the  great  struggle,  a  mere  symptom  of  the  crisis.  Long 
before  the  slavery  question  in  the  form  of  an  abstract  constitutional 
controversy  agitated  the  public  mind,  the  conflict  of  interests 
raged  in  our  national  councils.  What  mattered  it  that  the  strug 
gle  about  the  encouragement  of  home  industry  and  internal  im 
provements  was  not  ostensibly  carried  on  under  the  form  of  pro 
and  antislavery  ?  What  mattered  it  that  your  new-fangled  con 
stitutional  doctrines  were  not  yet  invented,  when  slavery  tried  to 
expand  by  the  annexation  of  foreign  countries?  that  no  Dred 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  255 

Scott  decision  was  yet  cooked  up,  when  the  right  of  petition  was 
curtailed,  when  attempts  were  made  to  arrest  the  discussion  of  the 
slavery  question  all  over  the  Union,  and  when  the  trial  by  jury 
and  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  were  overridden  by  the  fugitive 
slave  law  ?  And  even  lately,  when  the  slave  power,  with  one  gi 
gantic  grasp,  attempted  to  seize  the  whole  of  our  national  domain, 
what  else  was  and  is  your  new  constitutional  doctrine  but  an  ill- 
disguised  attempt  to  clothe  a  long-cherished  design  with  the  color 
of  law  ? 

"Read  your  history  with  an  impartial  eye,  and  you  will  find 
that  the  construction  of  the  constitution  always  shaped  itself 
according  to  the  prevailing  moral  impulses  or  the  predominance 
of  the  material  over  political  interests.  The  logic  of  our  minds 
is  but  too  apt  to  follow  in  the  track  of  our  sympathies  and  aspira 
tions.  It  was  when  the  South  had  control  of  the  government 
that  acts  were  passed  for  the  raising  of  duties  on  imports,  for  the 
creation  of  a  national  bank,  and  in  aid  of  the  American  shipping 
interest.  It  was  under  the  lead  of  the  South  that  the  systems 
of  internal  improvements  and  of  the  protection  of  home  industry 
were  inaugurated ;  it  was  the  South  no  less  than  the  North  that 
insisted  upon  and  exercised  the  power  of  Congress  to  exclude 
slavery  from  the  territories.  So  long  as  these  measures  seemed 
to  agree  with  the  predominant  interest  there  seemed  to  be  no 
question  about  their  constitutionality.  Even  Mr.  Calhoun  him 
self  said  in  one  of  his  most  celebrated  speeches,  delivered  in  the 
session  of  1815-1816,  'That  it  was  the  duty  of  the  government,  as 
a  means  of  defense,  to  encourage  the  domestic  industry  of  the 
country/  But  as  soon  as  it  was  found  out  that  this  policy  re 
dounded  more  to  the  benefit  of  free  labor  than  that  of  the  unen 
terprising  South,  then  the  same  men  who  had  inaugurated  it 
worked  its  overthrow,  on  the  plea  that  it  was  at  war  with  the  prin 
ciples  of  the  Constitution.  The  constitutionality  of  the  Ordinance 
of  1787  was  never  questioned  as  long  as  the  prevailing  sentiment 
in  the  South  ran  against  the  perpetuation  of  slavery.  The  Mis 
souri  Compromise  was  held  as  sacred  as  the  Constitution  itself, 
so  long  as  it  served  to  introduce  slave  states  into  the  Union ;  but 
no  sooner,  by  virtue  of  its  provisions,  were  free  territories  to  be 
organized,  than  its  unconstitutionality  was  discovered. 


256  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

"The  predominance  of  interests  determines  the  construction  of 
the  Constitution.  So  it  was  and  it  will  ever  be.  Only  those  who 
remained  true  to  the  original  program  of  the  fathers,  remained  true 
to  the  original  construction.  Decide  the  contest  of  principles 
underlying  interests,  and  the  conflict  of  constitutional  construc 
tion  will  settle  itself.  This  may  seem  a  dangerous  political  theory. 
It  is  not  an  article  of  my  creed,  not  a  matter  of  principles,  but  a 
matter  of  experience ;  not  a  doctrine,  but  a  fact. 

"Thus  the  all-pervading  antagonism  stands  before  us,  gigantic 
in  its  dimensions,  growing  every  day  in  the  awful  proportions  of 
its  problems,  involving  the  character  of  our  institutions ;  involv 
ing  our  relations  with  the  world  abroad ;  involving  our  peace, 
our  rights,  our  liberties  at  home ;  involving  our  growth  and  pros 
perity  ;  involving  our  moral  and  political  existence  as  a  nation. 

"How  shortsighted,  how  childish  are  those  who  find  its  origin 
in  artificial  agitation  !  As  though  we  could  produce  a  tempest  by 
blowing  our  noses,  or  cause  an  earthquake  by  stamping  our  puny 
feet  upon  the  ground.  (Laughter.)  But  how  to  solve,  how  to 
decide  it?  Let  us  pass  in  review  our  political  parties  and  the 
remedies  they  propose.  There  we  encounter  the  so-called  Union 
party,  with  Bell  and  Everett,  who  tell  us  the  best  way  to  settle 
the  controversy  is  to  ignore  it.  (Laughter.) 

"Ignore  it !  Ignore  it,  when  attempts  are  made  to  plunge  the 
country  into  war  and  disgrace,  for  the  purpose  of  slavery  exten 
sion  !  Ignore  it,  when  slavery  and  free  labor  wage  their  fierce  war 
about  the  possession  of  the  national  domain  !  Ignore  it,  when  the 
liberties  of  speech  and  of  the  press  are  attacked  !  Ignore  it, 
when  the  actual  settler  claims  the  virgin  soil,  and  the  slaveholding 
capitalists  claim  it  also  !  Ignore  it,  when  the  planting  interest 
seeks  to  establish  and  maintain  its  exclusive  supremacy  in  our 
economical  policy.  Ignore  it,  indeed  !  Ignore  the  fire  that  con 
sumes  the  corner  posts  of  your  house  I,  Ignore  the  storm  that 
breaks  the  rudder  and  tears  to  tatters  the  sails  of  your  ship  !  Con 
jure  the  revolted  elements  with  a  meek  Mt.  Vernon  lecture  !  Pour 
upon  the  furious  waves  the  placid  oil  of  a  quotation  from  Wash 
ington's  farewell  address  !  (Cheers  and  laughter.) 

"It  is  true  that  they  tell  us  that  they  will  enforce  the  laws  and 
the  constitution  well  enough !  But  what  laws  ?  Those  that 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  257 

free  labor  demand  or  those  that  slavery  give  us  ?  what  constitu 
tion?  That  of  Washington  and  Madison,  or  that  of  Slidell, 
Douglas,  and  Taney?  (Loud  and  long-continued  cheering.) 

"The  conflict  stands  there  with  the  stubborn  brute  force  of 
reality.  However  severely  it  may  disturb  the  nerves  of  timid 
gentlemen,  there  it  stands  and  speaks  the  hard  stern  language 
of  fact.  I  understand  well  that  great  problems  and  responsibilities 
should  be  approached  with  care  and  caution.  But  times  like  these 
demand  the  firm  action  of  men  who  know  what  they  will,  and  will 
do  it,  not  that  eunuch  policy,  which,  conscious  of  its  own  unpro 
ductiveness,  invites  us  blandly  to  settle  down  into  the  imbecile 
contentment  of  general  impotency.  They  cannot  ignore  the  con 
flict  if  they  would,  but  have  not  nerve  enough  to  decide  it  if  they 
could. 

"The  next  party  that  claims  our  attention  is  the  so-called 
Democracy.  As  it  is  my  object  to  discuss  the  practical,  not  the 
constitutional  aspects  of  the  problems  before  us,  I  might  pass  over 
the  divisions  existing  in  that  organization.  In  fact,  the  point 
that  separates  Mr.  Douglas  from  Mr.  Breckenridge  is  but  a  mere 
quibble,  a  mere  matter  of  etiquette.  Mr.  Douglas  is  unwilling 
to  admit  in  words  what  he  has  a  hundred  times  admitted  in  fact, 
for,  can  you  tell  me,  what  practical  difference  there  is  in  the  world 
between  direct  and  indirect  intervention  by  Congress  in  favor 
of  slavery  and  that  kind  of  nonintervention  by  Congress  which 
merely^consists  in  making  room  for  direct  intervention  by  the 
Supreme  Court?  And  besides,  in  nearly  all  practical  measures 
of  policy  Mr.  Douglas  is  regularly  to  be  found  on  the  side  of  the 
extreme  South.  Like  that  great  statesman  of  yours  (I  beg  your 
pardon,  gentlemen,  for  alluding  to  him  in  decent  political  com 
pany),  he  always  votes  against  measures  for  the  encouragement 
of  home  industry,  perhaps  because  he  does  not  understand  them. 
(Laughter.)  He  is  one  of  the  firmest  supporters  of  the  ascendency 
of  the  planters'  interests  in  our  economical  questions,  and  as  to 
the  extension  of  slavery  by  conquest  and  annexation,  the  wildest 
fillibusters  may  always  count  upon  his  tenderest  sympathies. 

"So  I  say  that  I  might  have  ignored  him,  if  he  had  not  succeeded 
in  creating  the  most  deafening  of  noises  with  the  hollowest  of 
drums.  (Loud  cheers.) 


258  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

"He  proposes  to  repress  the  'irrepressible  conflict '  with  what 
he  emphatically  styles  'his  great  principle.'  At  first  he  defined  it 
as  '  self-government  of  the  people  in  the  territories ' ;  but  it  became 
soon  apparent  that  under  his  great  principle  the  people  of  the  terri 
tories  were  governed  by  anybody  but  self,  and  he  called  it '  popular 
sovereignty.'  It  soon  turned  out  that  this  kind  of  sovereignty 
was  not  very  popular  after  all,  and  he  called  it  'nonintervention.' 
(Laughter.)  Methinks  something  will  intervene  pretty  soon  and 
he  will  strain  his  imagination  for  another  name,  if  it  be  worth  while 
at  all  to  christen  a  thing  which  never  had  any  tangible  existence. 

"But  if  we  may  believe  him,  his  'great  principle,'  and  nothing 
but  his  'great  principle,'  will  settle  the  'irrepressible  conflict/ 
and  restore  peace  and  harmony  to  the  nation ;  and,  in  fact,  Mr. 
Douglas  is  about  the  only  one  of  the  presidential  candidates  who 
insists  that  there  is  an  immediate  necessity  of  saving  that  ancient 
institution. 

"Let  us  judge  the  merits  of  the  great  principle  by  its  results. 
Has  it  secured  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  territories  the  right  of 
self-government?  Never  were  the  people  of  a  territory  subject 
to  a  despotism  more  arbitrary,  and  to  violence  more  lawless  and 
atrocious  than  were  the  people  of  Kansas  after  the  enactment  of 
the  Nebraska  bill.  Has  it  removed  the  slavery  question  from  the 
Halls  of  Congress  ?  The  fight  has  never  raged  with  greater  fierce 
ness,  and  Congress  hardly  ever  came  so  near  debating  with  bowie 
knives  and  revolvers,  as  about  the  questions  raised  by  the  Nebraska 
bill.  Has  it  established  safe  and  uniform  rules  for  the  construc 
tion  of  the  Constitution  ?  It  has  set  aside  the  construction  of  the 
Constitution  by  those  who  framed  it;  and  for  the  rest,  let  Mr. 
Douglas  give  you  his  opinion  of  the  Dred  Scott  decision.  Has 
it  given  peace  and  harmony  to  the  country  by  repressing  the 
'  irrepressible  conflict '  ?  Alas  !  poor  great  principle  !  this  ha 
rangue  of  peace  and  harmony  inflamed  the  'irrepressible  conflict/ 
even  inside  the  Democratic  party,  and  rent  into  two  sections  an 
organization  that  claimed  the  exclusive  privilege  of  nationality. 

"These  were  its  immediate  results.  It  is  true,  Mr.  Douglas 
accuses  his  adversaries  of  having  created  the  disturbance.  Cer 
tainly;  if  the  whole  American  nation  had  bowed  their  heads  in 
silent  obedience  before  Mr.  Douglas'  mandates,  there  would  have 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  259 

been  no  strife.  Mr.  Slidell,  Mr.  Buchanan,  and  Mr.  Brecken- 
ridge  may  say  the  same ;  so  may  the  Emperor  of  Austria  and  the 
King  of  Naples.  Such  men  are  apt  to  be  disturbed  by  opponents, 
and  Mr.  Douglas  need  not  be  surprised  if  he  has  a  few  ! 

"The  source  of  the  difficulty  was  this:  The  Kansas-Nebraska 
bill  was  thrown,  as  an  ambiguous,  illogical  measure,  between  two 
antagonistic  interests,  each  of  which  construed  it  to  its  own  ad 
vantage.  It  brought  the  contesting  forces  together,  face  to  face, 
without  offering  a  clear  ground  upon  which  to  settle  the  conflict. 
Thus  it  quickened  and  intensified  the  struggle,  instead  of  allaying 
it.  Hence  its  total  failure  as  a  harmonizing  measure. 

"What,  then,  is  the  positive  result?  As  to  its  practical  im 
portance  in  the  conflict  between  free  and  slave  labor,  Mr.  Douglas 
himself  enlightens  us  as  follows :  — 

Has  the  South  been  excluded  from  all  the  territory  acquired 
from  Mexico  ?  What  says  the  bill  from  the  House  of  Representa 
tives  now  on  your  table,  repealing  the  slave  code  in  New  Mexico 
established  by  the  people  themselves?  It  is  part  of  the  history 
of  the  country  that  under  this  doctrine  of  non-intervention,  this 
doctrine  that  you  delight  to  call  squatter  sovereignty,  the  people  of 
New  Mexico  have  introduced  and  protected  slavery  in  the  whole 
of  that  territory.  Under  this  doctrine  they  have  converted  a  tract 
of  free  territory  into  slave  territory,  more  than  five  times  the  size 
of  the  state  of  New  York.  Under  this  doctrine  slavery  has  been 
extended  from  the  Rio  Grande  to  the  Gulf  of  California,  and  from 
the  line  of  the  Republic  of  Mexico,  not  only  up  to  36°  30'  but  up 
to  38°  —  giving  you  a  degree  and  a  half  more  territory  than  you 
ever  claimed.  In  1848  and  1849  and  1850  you  only  asked  to  have 
the  line  of  36°  30'.  The  Nashville  convention  fixed  that  as  its 
ultimatum.  I  offered  it  in  the  Senate  in  August,  1848,  and  it  was 
adopted  here  but  rejected  in  the  House  of  Representatives.  You 
asked  only  up  to  36°  30'  and  nonintervention  has  given  you  up 
to  38°,  a  degree  and  a  half  more  than  you  asked ;  and  yet  you  say 
that  this  is  a  sacrifice  of  Southern  rights. 

' l  These  are  the  fruits  of  this  principle  which  the  Senator  from 
Mississippi  regards  as  hostile  to  the  rights  of  the  South.  Where 
did  you  ever  get  any  more  fruits  that  were  more  palatable  to  your 
tastes  or  more  refreshing  to  your  strength?  What  other  inch  of 


260  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

free  territory  has  been  converted  into  slave  territory  on  the  Amer 
ican  continent  since  the  revolution,  except  in  New  Mexico  and 
Arizona  under  the  principle  of  nonintervention  affirmed  at 
Charleston?  If  it  is  true  that  this  principle  of  nonintervention 
has  conferred  upon  you  all  that  immense  territory ;  has  protected 
slavery  in  that  comparatively  Northern  and  cold  region  where 
you  did  not  expect  it  to  go,  cannot  you  trust  the  same  principle 
further  South  when  you  come  to  acquire  additional  territory  from 
Mexico  ?  If  it  be  true  that  this  .principle  of  nonintervention  has 
given  to  slavery  all  New  Mexico,  which  was  surrounded  on  nearly 
every  side  by  free  territory,  will  not  the  same  principle  protect 
you  in  the  Northern  states  of  Mexico,  when  they  are  acquired, 
since  they  are  now  surrounded  by  slave  territory  ?' 

"  Indeed  !  This,  then,  is  the  practical  solution  of  the  difficulty 
which  Mr.  Douglas  proposes :  '  The  great  principle  of  noninter 
vention'  which,  according  to  his  own  testimony,  strengthens 
slavery  by  increasing  the  number  of  slave  states,  and  their  repre 
sentation  and  power  in  the  general  government;  to  which  is  to 
be  added  the  annexation  of  Cuba  and  the  Northern  states  of 
Mexico,  out  of  which  an  additional  number  of  slave  states  is  to 
be  carved.  But  his  Northern  friends  say  that  he  is  the  cham 
pion  of  free  labor  —  and  they  are  honorable  men. 

"Oh  !  what  a  deep-seated  overweening  confidence  Mr.  Douglas, 
when  he  made  this  statement,  must  have  had  in  the  unfathomable, 
desperate,  incorrigible  stupidity  of  those  Northern  Democrats 
who  support  him  for  the  purpose  of  baffling  and  punishing  the 
fire-eaters  of  the  South.  Good,  innocent  souls,  do  they  not  see 
that  by  supporting  Mr.  Douglas'  policy  which  throws  into  the  lap 
of  slavery  territory  after  territory,  they  will  strengthen  and  render 
more  overbearing  the  very  same  slave  power  they  mean  to  baffle 
and  punish  ?  Do  they  not  see  that  they  were  preparing  a  lash  for 
their  own  backs  ?  It  is  true,  when  they  feel  it,  and  they  deserve 
to  feel  it,  they  may  console  themselves  that  it  is  a  whip  of  their 
own  manufacture. 

"At  last  we  arrive  at  the  program  of  the  slave  power  in  its  open 
and  undisguised  forms,  of  which  Mr.  Breckenridge  is  the  repre 
sentative  and  Mr.  Douglas  the  servant,  although  he  does  not 
wear  its  livery  except  on  occasions  of  state. 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  261 

"This  program  is  as  follows:  The  agitation  of  the  slavery 
question,  North  and  South,  is  to  be  arrested;  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Law,  in  its  present  form,  is  to  be  strictly  carried  out,  and  all  state 
legislation  impeding  its  execution,  to  be  repealed;  the  constitu 
tional  right  of  slavery  to  occupy  the  territories  of  the  United  States 
and  to  be  protected  there,  is  to  be  acknowledged;  all  measures 
tending  to  impede  the  ingress  of  slavery,  and  its  establishment  in 
the  territories,  are  to  be  abandoned ;  the  opposition  to  the  con 
quest  and  annexation  of  foreign  countries,  out  of  which  more  slave 
states  can  be  formed,  is  to  be  given  up  ;  the  economic  policy  of  the 
planting  interest,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  encouragement  of  home 
industry,  is  to  become  the  ruling  policy  of  the  country. 

"This  is  the  Southern  solution  of  the  'irrepressible  conflict/ 

"This  program  possesses  at  least  the  merit  of  logic,  the  logic 
of  slavery  despotism  against  the  logic  of  free  labor  and  liberty. 
The  issue  is  plainly  made  up.  Free  labor  is  summoned  to  submit 
to  the  measures  which  slavery  deems  necessary  for  its  perpetuation. 
We  are  called  upon  to  adapt  our  laws  and  systems  of  policy,  and 
the  whole  development  of  our  social  organization,  to  the  necessities 
and  interests  of  slavery.  We  are  summoned  to  surrender.  Let 
us  for  a  moment  judge  the  people  of  the  free  states  by  the  meanest 
criterion  we  can  think  of ;  let  us  apply  suppositions  to  them,  which, 
if  applied  to  ourselves,  we  would  consider  an  insult. 

"If  the  people  of  the  free  states  were  so  devoid  of  moral  sense 
as  not  to  distinguish  between  right  and  wrong ;  so  devoid  of  gen 
erous  impulses  as  not  to  sympathize  with  the  downtrodden  and 
the  degraded,  so  devoid  of  manly  pride  as  to  be  naturally  inclined 
to  submit  to  everybody  who  is  impudent  enough  to  assume  the 
command ;  tell  me,  even  in  this  worst,  this  most  disgusting  of  all 
contingencies,  could  free  labor  quietly  submit  to  the  demands  of 
the  slave  power  so  long  as  it  has  a  just  appreciation  of  its  own 
interests  ?  If  we  did  not  care,  neither  for  other  people's  rights  nor 
for  our  own  dignity,  can  we  submit  as  long  as  we  are  for  our  own 
pockets?  Surrender  the  privilege  of  discussing  our  social  prob 
lems  without  restraint !  Be  narrowed  down  to  a  given  circle  of 
ideas,  which  we  shall  not  transgress  !  Do  we  not  owe  our  growth, 
prosperity,  and  power  to  that  freedom  of  inquiry  which  is  the  source 
of  .all  progress  and  improvement  ? 


262  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

" Surrender  the  national  domain  to  slavery!  Do  we  not  owe 
our  growth  and  prosperity  to  the  successful  labor  of  our  neighbors 
just  as  well  as  our  own?  Shall  we  consent  to  be  surrounded  and 
hemmed  in  with  thriftless  communities,  whose  institutions  retard 
our  own?  Abandon  all  laws  like  the  homestead  bill,  tending  to 
establish  free  labor  on  our  national  domain  !  Shall  we  thus 
give  up  the  rights  of  labor,  and  destroy  the  inheritance  of  our 
children  ? 

"Give  up  our  opposition  to  the  extension  of  slavery  by  the  con 
quest  of  foreign  countries  !  Shall  we  squander  the  blood  of  our 
sons  and  the  marrow  of  the  land  in  destructive  wars,  for  the  profit 
of  the  enemies  of  free  labor,  while  it  is  a  peaceful  development  to 
which  we  owe  our  power  in  the  world  ?  Adopt  the  exclusive 
economic  policy  of  the  planting  interest !  Shall  our  mineral 
wealth  sleep  undeveloped  in  the  soil?  Shall  our  water  powers 
run  idle,  and  the  bustle  of  our  factories  cease  ?  Shall  the  immense 
laboring  force  in  our  immense  population  be  deprived  of  the  ad 
vantage  of  a  harmonious  development  of  all  the  branches  of  human 
labor  ?  Shall  we  give  up  our  industrial  and  commercial  indepen 
dence  from  the  world  abroad  ?  Impossible  !  It  cannot  be  thought 
of !  Even  the  most  debased  and  submissive  of  our  dough-faces 
cannot  submit  to  it  as  soon  as  the  matter  comes  to  a  practical  test ; 
and  therefore  the  success  of  the  Southern  program  will  never 
bring  about  a  final  decision  of  the  conflict.  Suppose  we  were 
beaten  in  the  present  electoral  contest,  would  that  decide  the 
conflict  of  interests  forever  ?  No  !  Thanks  to  the  noble  instincts 
of  human  nature,  our  consciences  would  not  let  us  sleep ;  thanks 
to  the  good  sense  of  the  people,  their  progressive  interests  would 
not  suffer  them  to  give  up  the  struggle.  The  power  of  resistance, 
the  elasticity  of  free  society,  cannot  be  exhausted  by  one,  cannot 
be  annihilated  by  a  hundred  defeats.  Why  ?  Because  it  receives 
new  impulses,  new  inspirations  from  every  day's  work ;  it  marches 
on  in  harmony  with  the  spirit  of  the  age. 

" There  is  but  one  way  of  settling  the  'irrepressible  conflict/ 
It  is  not  by  resisting  the  spirit  of  the  times,  and  by  trying  to  neu 
tralize  its  impelling  power ;  for  you  attempt  that  in  vain ;  but  it  is 
by  neutralizing  the  obstacles  which  have  thrown  themselves  in 
the  path.  There  is  no  other.  The  'irrepressible  conflict '  will 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  263 

rage  with  unabated  fury  until  our  social  and  political  development 
is  harmonized  with  the  irrepressible  tendency  of  the  age. 

"That  is  the  solution  which  the  Republicans  propose.  Their 
program  is  simple  and  consistent. 

"Protection  of  our  natural  and  constitutional  rights.  Non 
interference  with  the  social  and  political  institutions  existing  by 
the  legislation  of  sovereign  states.  Exclusion  of  slavery  from  the 
national  territories ;  they  must  be  free  because  they  are  national. 
(Immense  cheering.) 

"Promotion  and  expansion  of  free  labor  by  the  homestead  bill 
and  the  encouragement  of  home  industry.  (Cheering  renewed.) 

"Will  this  effect  a  settlement  of  the  conflict?  Let  the  fathers 
of  this  republic  answer  the  question,  and  I  will  give  you  the  South 
ern  construction  of  their  policy.  In  a  debate  which  occurred  in 
the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  on  the  23d  of  January,  Mr.  Mason 
of  Virginia,  said :  '  Now,  as  far  as  concerns  our  ancestry,  I  am 
satisfied  of  this  —  they  were  not  abolitionists.  On  the  contrary, 
I  believe  this  was  their  opinion  —  their  prejudice  was  aimed  against 
the  foreign  slave  trade,  the  African  slave  trade,  and  their  belief 
was,  that  cutting  that  off,  slavery  would  die  out  of  itself,  without 
any  act  of  abolition.  I  attempted  at  one  time  to  show,  by  the 
recorded  opinions  of  Mr.  Madison,  that  the  famous  Ordinance  of 
1787,  so  far  as  it  prohibited  slavery  in  the  territory  northwest  of 
the  Ohio  River,  was  aimed  at  the  African  slave  trade,  and  at  that 
alone ;  the  idea  being  that  if  they  would  restrict  the  area  into 
which  slaves  would  be  introduced  from  abroad,  they  would,  to 
that  extent,  prevent  the  importation  of  slaves,  and  that,  when  it 
was  altogether  prevented,  the  condition  of  slavery  would  die  out 
of  itself ;  but  they  were  not  abolitionists,  far  less  within  the  mean 
ing  and  spirit  of  the  abolitionists  of  the  present  day/ 

"Well,  I  am  willing  to  accept  this  as  it  stands,  and  Mr.  Mason 
may  certainly  be  considered  good  Southern  authority.  I  will  not 
stop  to  investigate  the  depth  and  extent  of  the  antislavery  senti 
ments  of  such  men  as  Franklin,  who  was  father  of  an  abolitionist 
society,  and  of  Washington,  who  expressed  his  desire  'to  see 
slavery  abolished  by  law ' ;  I  am  satisfied  with  Mr.  Mason's  ad 
mission. 

"This,  then,  is  what  the  fathers  intended  to  effect;   to  bring 


264  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

about  a  state  of  things  by  which  slavery  would  die  out  of  itself. 
What  else  do  we  want?  'You  mean,  then,'  I  am  asked,  'to  adopt 
a  policy  which  will  work  the  peaceable  and  gradual  extinction  of 
slavery  ? '  And  I  answer,  '  Yes ;  for  if  we  do  not,  we  shall  have  to 
submit  to  a  policy  which  will  work  the  gradual  extinction  of  lib 
erty.'  There  is  the  dilemma.  Our  answer  is  understood.  If 
Washington,  Madison,  and  Jefferson  were  abolitionists,  we  are; 
Mr.  Mason  says  they  were  not ;  well,  then,  we  are  not,  for  our  policy 
has  been  theirs,  and  theirs  has  become  ours.  (Loud  cheers.) 

11  Will  this  policy  effect  a  solution  of  the  conflict?  It  will;  be 
cause  it  will  harmonize  our  social  and  political  development  with 
the  tendency  of  our  age,  by  neutralizing  the  obstacles  that  stand 
in  its  way. 

"But  I  am  told  that  these  obstacles  refuse  to  be  neutralized. 
They  will  resist.  Resist  by  what  ?  By  dissolving  the  Union  ! 
This  specter  has  so  long  haunted  the  imaginations  of  superstitious 
people,  that  it  is  time  at  last  to  anatomize  the  bloodless  body. 

"They  threaten  to  dissolve  the  Union.  Why?  First,  because 
we  do  not  stop  the  agitation  of  the  slavery  question.  It  is  true, 
we  do  discuss  every  social  problem  that  presents  itself  to  our 
consideration ;  we  agitate  it,  and  we  do  not  mean  to  stop.  And, 
therefore,  slaveholders,  you  will  dissolve  the  Union?  Do  you 
think  we  shall  make  haste  to  stop  the  agitation,  to  muzzle  our 
mouths  and  our  press  after  you  have  dissolved  it  ?  United  as  we 
are  with  you  at  present,  we  certainly  are  not  devoid  of  fraternal 
sympathy ;  but  let  the  acrimonious  feelings  arising  from  a  divorce 
embitter  our  relations,  will  not  the  agitation,  which  annoys  you 
now,  be  a  hundred  times  more  dangerous  to  you  then  ?  (Cheers.) 

"Second,  you  threaten  to  dissolve  the  Union  because  we  do  not 
show  sufficient  alacrity  in  the  catching  of  fugitive  slaves.  True, 
we  are  not  much  inclined  to  perform  for  the  slaveholder  a  menial, 
dirty  service,  which  he  would  hardly  stoop  to  do  for  himself. 
(Enthusiastic  cheering.)  And,  therefore,  you  will  dissolve  the 
Union  !  Do  you  not  see  that,  while  now,  indeed,  a  great  many 
slaves  escape,  the  North  would,  after  a  dissolution,  scorn  to  sur 
render  a  single  one  ?  W  ould  not  what  is  now  the  Canada  line  be 
removed  right  to  the  banks  of  the  Ohio  ? 

"Third,  you  threaten  the  dissolution  of  the  Union  because  we 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  265 

do  not  mean  to  surrender  the  territories  to  slavery.  True,  we 
mean  to  use  every  constitutional  means  within  our  reach  to  save 
them  to  free  labor.  And,  therefore,  you  will  dissolve  the  Union ! 
Do  you  think  that  after  a  dissolution  we  shall  courteously  invite 
slavery  to  make  itself  comfortable  on  our  national  domain?  As 
things  are  now,  *  champions  of  free  labor/  such  as  Douglas,  may 
occasionally  offer  you  a  chance  to  acquire  for  slavery  a  territory 
'five  times  as  large  as  the  state  of  New  York/  but  will  that  be 
possible  after  the  Union  has  been  dissolved?  Mark  well  what 
position  the  North  will  take,  if,  by  a  revolutionary  act  against  our 
national  government,  you  should  attempt  to  cut  loose  from  the 
Union.  The  territories  are  the  property  of  the  Union  as  such; 
those  who  in  a  revolutionary  way  desert  the  Union,  give  up  their 
right  to  the  property  of  the  Union.  That  property,  the  territories, 
will  remain  where  the  Union  remains,  and  the  slave  power  would 
do  well  first  to  consider  how  much  blood  it  can  spare,  before  it 
attempts  to  strip  the  Union  of  a  single  square  foot  of  ground. 
(Tremendous  cheering.)  Thus,  while  according  to  Judge  Douglas, 
you  now  have  a  chance  to  acquire  slave  territory  by  the  operation 
of  his  'great  principle/  that  chance  will  be  entirely  gone  as  soon  as 
by  a  secession  you  give  up  the  least  shadow  of  a  right  to  the 
property  of  the  Union. 

"Lastly,  you  threaten  to  dissolve  the  Union,  if  the  North  re 
fuses  to  submit  to  the  exclusive  economic  policy  of  the  planting 
interest.  You  want  to  establish  the  commercial  and  industrial 
independence  of  the  slaveholding  states.  For  years  you  have 
held  Southern  conventions  and  passed  resolutions  to  that  effect. 
You  resolved  not  to  purchase  any  longer  the  products  of  Northern 
industrial  labor,  but  to  build  your  own  factories ;  not  to  carry  on 
your  exporting  and  importing  trade  any  longer  by  Northern  ships, 
but  to  establish  steamship  lines  and  commercial  connections  of 
your  own.  Well,  enough.  Why  did  you  not  do  it,  after  having 
resolved  it?  Was  it  want  of  money?  You  have  an  abundance 
of  it.  Was  it  want  of  determination  ?  Your  resolutions  displayed 
the  fiercest  zeal.  What  was  it,  then?  And,  indeed,  the  failure 
is  magnificently  complete.  Senator  Mason's  homespun  coat, 
sewn  with  Yankee  thread  and  needle,  adorned  with  Yankee 
buttons,  hangs  in  the  closet,  a  lone  star  in  solitary  splendor. 


266  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

(Loud  laughter.)  After  trying  to  establish  a  large  shoe  factory 
for  the  South,  you  came  after  a  while  to  the  irresistible  conclusion 
that  you  must  wear  Massachusetts  shoes  and  boots  or  go  bare 
footed.  And  even  your  Norfolk  steamships  are  not  launched 
yet  from  the  dry-docks  of  Southern  imagination.  (Laughter.) 
How  is  this  ?  I  will  tell  you.  The  very  same  institution  for  the 
protection  and  perpetuation  of  which  you  want  to  establish  your 
commercial  and  industrial  independence,  is  incompatible  with 
commercial  and  industrial  labor  and  enterprise. 

"For  this  there  are  several  excellent  reasons.  First,  that  class 
of  your  society  which  rules  and  wants  to  perpetuate  its  rule,  does 
not  consist  of  workingmen.  The  inspiration  of  regular  activity 
is  foreign  to  their  minds.  Living  upon  the  forced  labor  of  others, 
they  find  their  pride  in  being  gentlemen  of  leisure.  But  it  requires 
men  of  a  superior  organization  to  make  leisure  productive;  men 
of  the  ordinary  stamp,  who  have  the  leisure  for  doing  something, 
will  in  most  cases  do  nothing.  But  it  requires  active  labor  to 
make  us  understand  and  appreciate  labor  in  order  to  be  able  to 
direct  labor.  Hence  the  slaveholders  cannot  take  the  lead  in 
such  a  commercial  and  industrial  movement  without  changing 
the  nature  of  their  condition.  But  you  may  object,  that  they  can 
at  least  encourage  commerce  and  industry,  and  leave  the  exe 
cution  of  their  plans  and  wishes  to  others.  Indeed  !  But  you 
must  not  forget  that  in  modern  times  the  most  active  and  enter 
prising  class  of  society  as  soon  as  it  becomes  numerous,  will  in 
evitably  become  the  ruling  class.  How  can,  therefore,  the  slave 
holders  do  as  you  say,  without  undermining  the  foundation  of 
their  own  ascendency !  But  it  is  just  that  ascendency  by  which 
they  mean  not  to  weaken,  but  to  fortify.  Do  not  bring  forward 
this  city  of  St.  Louis  as  proof  to  the  contrary.  Your  commerce 
and  your  industry  are  indeed  largely  developed,  although  Missouri 
is  a  slave  state,  but  do  you  not  see  that  in  the  same  measure  as  they 
rise,  the  ascendency  of  the  slave  power  disappears  ?  (Repeated 
cheering.)  Thus  this  has  become  a  free  city  on  slave  soil. 

"But  this  is  not  all.  Not  only  are  the  slaveholders,  as  a  class, 
unfit  to  direct  the  commercial  and  industrial  movement,  but  their 
system  of  labor  is  unfit  to  carry  it  out.  Commerce  and  industry, 
in  order  to  become  independent,  need  intelligent  labor.  In  the 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  267 

North,  every  laborer  thinks,  and  is  required  to  think.  In  the 
South  the  laborer  is  forbidden  to  think,  lest  he  think  too  much, 
for  thought  engenders  aspirations.  (Laughter  and  applause.) 
With  us  progress  and  enterprise  derive  their  main  support,  their 
strongest  impulses,  from  the  intellectual  development  of  the  labor 
ing  classes.  We  do  not  dread  the  aspirations  from  it;  it  is  the 
source  of  our  prosperity,  and,  at  the  same  time,  of  our  safety. 
Our  laboring  man  must  be  a  free  man,  in  order  to  be  what  he  ought 
to  be,  an  intelligent  laborer.  Therefore,  we  educate  him  for 
liberty  by  our  system  of  public  instruction.  In  the  South,  the 
intellectual  development  of  the  laboring  classes  necessary  for  in 
telligent  labor,  would  create  aspirations  dangerous  to  your  do 
mestic  institutions.  Your  laboring  man  must  be  a  brute  in  order 
to  remain  what  you  want  him  to  be,  a  slave.  Therefore,  you  with 
hold  from  him  all  means  of  intellectual  development.  Among  our 
farms  and  workshops  there  stands  an  institution  from  which  our 
system  of  labor  derives  its  inspirations ;  that  is,  our  schoolhouse, 
where  our  free  laborers  are  educated.  On  your  plantation  fields 
there  stands  another  institution,  from  which  your  system  of  labor 
derives  its  inspirations;  and  that  is  your  schoolhouse,  where 
your  slaves  are  flogged.  And  you  speak  of  establishing  the  com 
mercial  and  industrial  independence  of  the  slaveholding  states  !  [/ 
Do  you  not  see,  that,  in  order  to  do  this,  you  must  adapt  your 
system  of  labor  to  that  purpose,  by  making  the  laborer  intelligent, 
respectable,  and  at  the  same  time  aspiring?  But  if  by  making 
the  laborer  intelligent,  respectable,  and  aspiring,  you  attempt  to 
force  industrial  enterprise,  in  a  large  measure,  upon  the  slave 
states,  do  you  not  see  that  your  system  of  slave  labor  must  yield  ? 
To  foster  commerce  and  industry  in  the  slave  states,  for  the  pur 
pose  of  protecting  slavery,  would  it  not  be  like  letting  the  sunlight 
into  a  room  which  you  want  to  keep  dark?  Hence  the  slave 
states  can  never  become  commercially  and  industrially  indepen 
dent  as  long  as  they  remain  slave  states.  They  will  always  be 
obliged  to  buy  from  others,  and  others  will  do  their  carrying  trade. 
At  present  they  do  their  business  with  friends,  who  are  united 
with  them  by  the  bonds  of  the  Union.  They  speak  of  dissolving 
that  Union ;  then,  as  now,  they  will  be  obliged  to  transact  the  same 
business  with  us,  their  nearest  neighbors,  for  if  they  could  do  other- 


268  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMBAIGN 

wise,  they  would  have  done  so  long  ago.  Would  they  prefer  by  the 
dissolution  of  the  Union  to  make  enemies  of  those  upon  whom  they 
will  always  be  commercially  and  industrially  dependent  ? 

"Thus,  you  see,  the  dissolution  of  the  Union  would  in  all  points 
of  dispute  defeat  the  very  object  for  which  the  South  might  feel 
inclined  to  attempt  it.  It  would  effect  just  the  contrary  of  what 
it  was  intended  for,  and  indeed,  if  there  is  a  party  that  can  logi 
cally  and  consistently  advocate  the  dissolution  of  the  Union,  it  is 
the  party  of  extreme  abolitionists  who  desire  to  extinguish  slavery 
and  punish  the  South  by  a  sudden  and  violent  crisis.  But  as  to 
the  slave  states,  as  long  as  they  have  sense  enough  to  understand 
their  interests,  and  to  appreciate  their  situation,  they  may  thank 
their  good  fortune,  if  they  are  suffered  to  stay  in  the  Union  with 
confederates,  who  are,  indeed,  not  willing  to  sacrifice  their  own 
principles  and  interests  to  slavery,  but  by  the  radiating  influence 
of  their  own  growth  and  energy  will,  at  least,  draw  the  Southern 
states,  also,  upon  the  road  of  progressive  development. 

"But  we  are  told  that  the  people  of  the  slave  states  are  a  war 
like  race,  and  that  they  will  gain  by  force  what  we  are  unwilling 
peacefully  to  concede.  War  !  What  a  charm  there  is  in  that 
word  for  a  people  of  colonels  and  generals !  Well,  since  that  old 
German  monk  invented  that  insignificant  black  powder,  which 
blew  the  strongholds  of  feudalism  into  the  air,  war  falls  more  and 
more  under  the  head  of  the  mathematical  sciences.  Don  Quixote, 
who,  undoubtedly,  would  have  been  a  hero  in  the  seventh  century, 
would  certainly  be  the  most  egregious  fool  in  the  nineteenth.  I 
have  nothing  to  say  about  the  bravery  of  the  Southern  people,  for 
aught  I  care  they  may  be  braver  than  they  pretend  to  be ;  but  I 
invite  them  candidly  to  open  their  eyes. 

"I  will  not  compare  the  resources  of  the  South,  in  men  and 
money,  to  those  of  the  North,  although  statistical  statements 
would  demonstrate  the  overwhelming  superiority  of  the  latter. 
We  can  afford  to  be  liberal,  and  for  argument's  sake,  admit  that 
the  South  will  equal  the  North  in  numbers;  and  if  they  insist 
upon  it,  excel  us  in  martial  spirit.  But  it  requires  very  little 
knowledge  of  military  matters  to  understand  that  aside  from  num 
bers,  equipment,  courage,  and  discipline,  the  strength  of  an  army 
consists  in  its  ability  to  concentrate  its  forces,  at  all  times,  upon  the 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  269 

decisive  point.  'Providence  is  on  the  side  of  the  big  battalions/ 
said  Napoleon.  That  means  not  that  victory  will  always  be  with 
the  most  numerous  army,  but  with  that  which  is  always  able  to 
appear  in  strength  where  the  decisive  blow  is  to  be  struck.  An 
army  that  is  always  scattered  over  a  large  surface  is,  properly 
speaking,  no  army  at  all.  Even  by  a  much  less  numerous  but 
concentrated  enemy,  it  will  be  beaten  in  detail,  division  after 
division ;  it  is  defeated  before  having  lost  a  man.  This  is  plain. 

"The  South  thinks  of  going  to  war  for  the  benefit  and  protection 
of  slavery.  But  slavery  is  not  merely  an  abstract  principle ; 
slavery  consists  materially  in  the  individual  slaves,  in  so  and  so, 
many  millions  of  human  chattels  scattered  over  so  and  so  many 
thousands  of  square  miles.  In  order  to  protect  slavery,  it  is 
essential  that  the  slaveholders  be  protected  in  the  possession  of 
their  slaves. 

"I  say,  therefore,  that  slavery  cannot  expect  to  be  protected 
in  general  without  being  protected  in  detail.  But  how  can  you 
protect  it  in  detail  ?  By  guarding  fifteen  hundred  miles  of  North 
ern  frontier  and  two  thousand  miles  of  seacoast  against  an  enemy 
who  is  perfectly  free  in  his  movements,  and  aided  by  an  extensive 
railroad  system  always  able  to  concentrate  his  forces  wherever 
he  pleases  ?  It  is  impossible ;  the  dullest  understanding  sees  it. 
It  may  be  said  that  it  will  not  be  necessary ;  indeed,  for  the  free 
states  it  would  not ;  they  may,  in  order  to  concentrate  their  forces, 
expose  their  territory;  for  the  damage  done  by  an  invasion  is 
easily  repaired.  The  retreating  invader  cannot  carry  the  liber 
ties  of  the  invaded  country  away  with  him.  (Cheers.)  Not  so 
with  slavery.  A  Northern  antislavery  army,  or  even  a  small 
flying  corps  invading  a  slaveholding  state,  would  perhaps  not  sys 
tematically  liberate  the  slaves,  but  at  all  events  it  would  not 
squander  much  time  and  health  in  catching  the  runaway.  The 
probability,  therefore,  is  that  wherever  a  Northern  army  appears, 
the  slaves  disappear,  and  slavery  with  them  —  at  least  for  the 
time  being.  Invade  a  free  state  and  the  restoration  of  liberty, 
after  the  attack  is  repulsed,  requires  only  the  presence  of  freemen. 
But  the  restoration  of  slavery  will  require  capital ;  that  capital 
consisted  principally  in  slaves ;  the  slaves  have  run  away,  and  with 
them  the  capital  necessary  for  the  restoration  of  slavery. 


270  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

"The  slave  states,  therefore,  cannot  expose  their  territory 
without  leaving  unprotected  the  institution,  for  the  protection  of 
which  the  war  was  undertaken.  They  have  to  cover  thousands 
and  thousands  of  vulnerable  points,  for  every  plantation  is  an 
open  wound,  every  negro  cabin  a  sore.  Every  border  or  seaboard 
slave  state  will  need  her  own  soldiers,  and  more,  too,  for  her  own 
protection;  and  where  will  be  the  material  for  the  concentrated 
army  ?  Scattered  over  thousands  of  miles  without  the  possibility 
of  concentration. 

"  Besides,  the  slave  states  harbor  a  dangerous  enemy  within 
their  own  boundaries,  and  that  is  slavery  itself.  Imagine  they 
are  at  war  with  an  antislavery  people,  whom  they  have  exasper 
ated  by  their  own  hostility.  What  will  be  the  effect  upon  the 
slaves?  The  question  is  not  whether  the  North  will  instigate  a 
slave  rebellion,  for  I  suppose  they  will  not ;  the  question  is,  whether 
they  can  prevent  it,  and  I  think  they  cannot.  But  the  mere  an 
ticipation  of  a  negro  insurrection  (and  the  heated  imagination  of 
the  slaveholder  will  discover  symptoms  of  a  rebellious  spirit  in 
every  trifle)  will  paralyze  the  whole  South.  Do  you  remember 
the  effect  of  John  Brown's  attempt  ?  The  severest  blow  he  struck 
at  the  slave  power  was  not  that  he  disturbed  a  town  and  killed 
several  citizens,  but  that  he  revealed  the  weakness  of  the  whole 
South.  Let  Governor  Wise  of  Virginia  carry  out  his  threatened 
invasion  of  the  free  states,  not  with  twenty-three,  but  with  two 
thousand  and  three  hundred  followers  at  his  heels ;  what  will  be 
the  result  ?  As  long  as  they  behave  themselves  we  shall  let  them 
alone ;  but  as  soon  as  they  create  any  disturbance  they  will  be 
put  into  the  station  house ;  and  the  next  day  we  shall  read  in  the 
newspapers  of  some  Northern  city,  among  the  reports  of  the  police 
court :  Henry  A.  Wise  and  others,  for  disorderly  conduct,  fined  $5 
(loud  laughter  and  applause) ;  or,  if  he  has  made  an  attempt  on 
any  man's  life,  or  against  our  institutions,  he  will  most  certainly 
find  a  Northern  jury  proud  enough  to  acquit  him  on  the  ground 
of  incorrigible  mental  derangement.  (Continued  laughter  and 
applause.)  Our  pictorial  prints  will  have  material  for  caricatures 
for  two  issues,  and  a  burst  of  laughter  will  ring  to  the  skies  from 
Maine  to  California.  And  there  is  the  end  of  it.1  But  behold 

1  See  pp.  187-189  for  the  humorous  treatment  of  secession  by  the  Re 
publicans. 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  271 

John  Brown  with  twenty-three  men  raising  a  row  at  Harper's 
Ferry;  the  whole  South  frantic  with  terror;  the  whole  state  of 
Virginia  in  arms ;  troops  marching  and  countermarching,  as  if  the 
battle  of  Austerlitz  was  to  be  fought  over  again;  innocent  cows 
shot  at  as  bloodthirsty  invaders,  and  even  the  evening  song  of  the 
peaceful  whippoorwills  mistaken  for  the  battle  cry  of  rebellion; 
(incessant  laughter),  and  those  are  the  men  who  will  expose  them 
selves  to  the  chances  of  a  war  with  an  antislavery  people  ?  Will 
they  not  look  upon  every  captain  as  a  John  Brown,  and  every 
sergeant  and  private  as  a  Coppoc  or  a  Stephens  ?  They  will  not 
have  men  enough  to  quiet  their  fears  at  home ;  what  will  they  have 
to  oppose  to  the  enemy  ?  Every  township  will  want  its  home  regi 
ment,  every  plantation  its  garrison ;  and  what  will  be  left  for  the 
field  army?  No  sooner  will  a  movement  of  concentration  be 
attempted  than  the  merest  panic  will  undo  it  and  frustrate  it 
forever.  Themistocles  might  say  that  Greece  was  on  his  ships ; 
a  French  general  might  say  that  the  Republic  was  in  his  camp ; 
but  slavery  will  be  neither  on  the  ships  nor  in  the  camp ;  it  will 
be  spread  defenseless  over  thousands  of  square  miles.  This  will 
be  their  situation  ;  either  they  concentrate  their  forces  and  slavery 
will  be  exposed  everywhere ;  or  they  do  not  concentrate  them 
and  their  strength  will  be  nowhere.  They  want  war  ?  Let  them 
try  it !  They  will  try  it  but  once.  And  thus  it  turns  out  that  the 
very  same  thing  that  would  be  the  cause  of  the  war,  would  at  the 
same  time  disable  them  to  carry  on  the  war.  The  same  institution 
that  wants  protection  will  at  the  same  time  disarm  its  protectors. 
Yes,  slavery  which  can  no  longer  be  defended  writh  arguments, 
can  no  longer  be  defended  with  arms. 

"  There  is  your  dissolution  of  the  Union.  The  Southern  states 
cannot  desire  it,  for  it  would  defeat  the  very  objects  for  which  it 
might  be  undertaken ;  they  cannot  attempt  it,  for  slavery  would 
lay  them  helpless  at  the  feet  of  the  North.  Slavery,  which  makes 
it  uncomfortable  to  stay  in  the  Union,  makes  it  impossible  for  them 
to  go  out  of  it.  What,  then,  will  the  South  do  in  the  case  of  a 
Republican  victory  ?  I  answer  that  question  with  another  one , 
what  can  the  South  do  in  the  case  of  a  Republican  victory  ?  Will 
there  be  a  disturbance  ?  The  people  of  the  South  themselves  will 
have  to  put  it  down.  Will  they  submit  ?  Not  to  Northern  dicta- 


272  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

tion,  but  to  their  own  good  sense.  They  have  considered  us  their 
enemies  as  long  as  they  ruled  us ;  they  will  find  out  that  we  are 
their  friends  as  soon  as  we  cease  to  be  their  subjects.  They  have 
dreamed  so  long  of  the  blessings  of  slavery ;  they  will  open  their 
eyes  again  to  the  blessings  of  liberty.  They  will  discover  that 
they  are  not  conquered,  but  liberated.  Will  slavery  die  out  ?  As 
surely  as  freedom  will  not  die  out. 

"  Slaveholders  of  America,  I  appeal  to  you.  Are  you  really  in 
earnest  when  you  speak  of  perpetuating  slavery?  Shall  it  never 
cease?  Never?  Stop  and  consider  where  you  are  and  in  what 
days  you  live. 

This  is  the  nineteenth  century.  Never  since  mankind  has  a 
recollection  of  times  gone  by,  has  the  human  mind  disclosed  such 
wonderful  powers.  The  hidden  forces  of  nature  we  have  torn 
from  their  mysterious  concealment  and  yoked  them  into  the  har 
ness  of  usefulness;  they  carry  our  thoughts  over  slender  wires 
to  distant  nations;  they  draw  our  wagons  over  the  highways  of 
trade ;  they  pull  the  gigantic  oars  of  our  ships ;  they  set  in  motion 
the  iron  fingers  of  our  machinery ;  they  will  soon  plow  our  fields 
and  gather  our  crops.  The  labor  of  the  brain  has  exalted  to  a 
mere  bridling  and  controlling  of  natural  forces  the  labor  of  the 
hand ;  and  you  think  you  can  perpetuate  a  system  which  reduces 
man,  however  degraded,  yet  capable  of  development,  to  the  level 
of  a  soulless  machine? 

"  This  is  the  world  of  the  nineteenth  century.  The  last  remnants 
of  feudalism  in  the  old  world  are  fast  disappearing.  The  Czar 
of  Russia,  in  the  fulness  of  imperial  power,  is  forced  to  yield  to 
the  irresistible  march  of  human  progress,  and  abolishes  serfdom. 
Even  the  Sultan  of  Turkey  can  no  longer  maintain  the  barbarous 
customs  of  the  Moslem  against  the  pressure  of  the  century,  and 
slavery  disappears.  And  you,  citizens  of  a  Republic,  you  think 
you  can  arrest  the  wheel  of  progress  with  your  Dred  Scott  decisions 
and  Democratic  platforms  ?  (Enthusiastic  cheers.) 

"Look  around  you  and  see  how  lonesome  you  are  in  this  wide 
world  of  ours.  As  far  as  modern  civilization  throws  its  rays,  what 
people,  what  class  of  society  is  there  like  you  ?  Cry  out  into  the 
world  your  wild  and  guilty  fantasy  of  property  in  man,  and  every 
echo  responds  with  a  cry  of  horror  or  contempt;  every  breeze, 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  273 

from  whatever  point  of  the  compass  it  may  come,  brings  you  a 
verdict  of  condemnation.  There  is  no  human  heart  that  sym 
pathizes  with  your  cause,  unless  it  sympathizes  with  the  cause  of 
despotism  in  every  form.  There  is  no  human  voice  to  cheer  you 
on  in  your  struggle  ;  there  is  no  human  eye  that  has  a  tear  for  your 
reverses ;  no  link  of  sympathy  between  the  common  cause  of  the 
great  human  brotherhood  and  you.  You  hear  of  emancipation 
in  Russia  and  wish  it  would  fail.  You  hear  of  Italy  rising,  and  fear 
the  spirit  of  liberty  should  become  contagious.  Where  all  man 
kind  rejoices,  you  tremble.  Where  all  mankind  love,  you  hate. 
W'here  all  mankind  curses,  you  sympathize. 

"And  in  this  appalling  solitude  you  stand  alone  against  a 
powerful  world,  alone  against  a  great  century  fighting,  hopeless 
as  the  struggle  of  the  Indians  against  the  onward  march  of  civiliza 
tion.  Use  all  the  devices  which  the  inventive  genius  of  despotism 
may  suggest,  and  yet  how  can  you  resist  ?  In  every  little  village 
schoolhouse,  the  little  children  who  learn  to  read  and  write,  are 
plotting  against  you ;  in  every  laboratory  of  science,  in  every 
machine  shop,  the  human  mind  is  working  the  destruction  of  your 
idol.  You  cannot  make  an  attempt  to  keep  pace  with  the  general 
progress  of  mankind,  without  plotting  against  yourselves.  Every 
steam  whistle,  every  puffing  locomotive  is  sounding  the  shriek 
of  liberty  into  your  ears.  From  the  noblest  instincts  of  our  hearts 
down  to  sordid  greediness  of  gain  every  impulse  of  human  nature 
is  engaged  in  this  universal  conspiracy.  How  can  you  resist  ? 
Where  are  your  friends  in  the  North?  Your  ever  ready  sup 
porters  are  scattered  to  the  winds  as  by  enchantment,  never  to 
unite  again.  Hear  them  trying  to  save  their  own  fortunes,  swear 
with  treacherous  eagerness  that  they  have  nothing  in  common 
with  you.  And  your  opponent?  Your  boasts  have  lost  their 
charm,  your  threats  have  lost  their  terrors  upon  them.  The  at 
tempt  is  idle  to  cloak  the  sores  of  Lazarus  with  the  lion  skin  of 
Hercules.  We  know  you.  Every  one  of  your  boasts  is  understood 
as  a  disguised  form  of  weakness ;  every  shout  of  defiance  as  a  dis 
guised  cry  for  mercy.  That  game  is  played  out.  Do  not  deceive 
yourselves.  This  means  not  only  the  destruction  of  a  party,  this 
means  the  defeat  of  a  cause.  Be  shrewder  than  the  shrewdest, 
braver  than  the  bravest ;  it  is  all  in  vain ;  your  cause-  is  doomed. 
T 


274  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

"And  in  the  face  of  all  this  you  insist  upon  hugging,  with  dogged 
stubbornness,  your  fatal  infatuation?  Why  not  with  manly 
boldness,  swing  round  into  the  grand  march  of  progressive  human 
ity  ?  You  say  it  cannot  be  done  to-day.  Can  it  be  done  to-mor 
row  ?  Will  it  be  easier  twenty,  fifty  years  hence,  when  the  fearful 
increase  of  the  negro  population  will  have  aggravated  the  evils 
of  slavery  an  hundred  fold,  and  with  it  the  different  ties  of  its 
extinction?  Did  you  ever  think  of  this?  The  final  crisis  will 
come  with  the  inexorable  certainty  of  fate,  the  more  terrible,  the 
longer  it  is  delayed.  Will  you  content  yourself  with  the  criminal 
words,  'after  me  the  deluge'?  Is  that  the  inheritance  you  mean 
to  leave  to  coming  generations  ?  an  inheritance  of  disgrace,  crime, 
blood,  destruction?  Hear  me,  slaveholders  of  America.  If  you 
have  no  sense  of  right,  no  appreciation  of  your  own  interests, 
I  entreat,  I  implore  you,  have  at  least  pity  on  your  children. 

"I  hear  the  silly  objection  that  your  sense  of  honor  forbids  you 
to  desert  your  cause.  Imagine  a  future  generation  standing  around 
the  tombstone  of  the  bravest  of  you,  and  reading  the  inscription, 
1  Here  lies  a  gallant  man  who  lived  and  died  true  to  the  cause  — 
of  human  slavery.'  What  will  the  verdict  be  ?  His  very  progeny 
will  disown  him,  and  exclaim,  'He  must  have  been  either  a  knave 
or  a  fool.'  There  is  not  one  of  you,  who  if  he  could  rise  from  the 
dead  a  century  hence,  would  not  gladly  exchange  his  epitaph  for 
that  of  the  meanest  of  those  who  hung  at  Charleston. 

" Sense  of  honor!  Since  when  has  it  become  dishonorable  to 
give  up  the  errors  of  yesterday  for  the  truths  of  to-day?  to  pre 
vent  future  disasters  by  timely  reforms  ?  Since  when  has  it  ceased 
to  be  the  highest  glory  to  sacrifice  one's  prejudices  and  momentary 
advantages  upon  the  altar  of  the  common  weal  ?  But  those  who 
seek  their  glory  in  stubbornly  resisting  what  is  glorious,  must 
find  their  end  in  inglorious  misery. 

"I  turn  to  you,  Republicans  of  Missouri!  Your  countrymen 
owe  you  a  debt  of  admiration  and  gratitude  to  which  my  poor 
voice  can  give  but  a  feeble  expression.  You  have  undertaken 
the  noble  task  of  showing  the  people  of  the  North  that  the  slave- 
holding  states  themselves  contain  the  elements  of  regeneration; 
and  of  demonstrating  to  the  South  how  that  regeneration  can  be 
effected.  You  have  inspired  the  wavering  masses  with  confidence 


REPUBLICAN  SPEECH  BY  CARL  SCHURZ  275 

in  the  practicability  of  your  ideas.  To  the  North  you  have  given 
encouragement ;  to  the  South  you  have  set  an  example.  Let  me 
entreat  you  not  to  underrate  your  noble  vocation.  Struggle  on, 
brave  men  !  The  anxious  wishes  of  millions  are  hovering  around 
you.  Struggle  on  until  the  banner  of  emancipation  is  planted 
upon  the  capitol  of  your  state,  and  one  of  the  proudest  chapters 
of  our  history  will  read  —  Missouri  led  the  van  and  the  nation 
followed!" 


APPENDIX   C 

DOUGLAS  DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  STEPHEN 
A.  DOUGLAS,  RALEIGH,  NORTH  CAROLINA, 
AUGUST  30,  I8601 

"MR.  PRESIDENT,  I  am  conscious  that  you  have,  in  the  enthu 
siasm  produced  by  the  circumstances  with  which  you  are  sur 
rounded  to-day,  done  me  more  than  justice  in  your  presentation 
to  this  audience.  I  thank  you,  sir,  sincerely  for  the  kind  terms 
in  which  you  have  been  pleased  to  speak  of  me.  It  is  a  matter  of 
pride  and  pleasure  to  be  presented  to  the  people  of  the  Old  North 
State,  by  a  representative  of  Mecklenburg.  (Cheers.)  History 
will  always  preserve  the  fact  that  in  North  Carolina  the  first 
Declaration  of  Independence  was  declared  to  the  world,  and  that 
Mecklenburg  has  the  honor  of  being  the  county  where  that  glorious 
deed  was  done.  Carolinians  have  a  right  to  be  proud  of  that  great 
event  in  her  history,  but  while  you  pride  yourselves  upon  it,  you 
must  remember,  that  the  sacred  obligation  rests  upon  you  and 
your  children  to  maintain  inviolate  the  principles  which  the  Declara 
tion  was  intended  to  perpetuate. 

"What  was  the  grievance  of  which  North  Carolina  complained, 
when  she  proclaimed  to  the  world  her  separation  from  the  British 
Crown  ?  what  the  grievance  of  which  all  the  colonies  complained  ? 
and  what  were  the  objects  they  intended  to  accomplish  by  that 
Declaration?  Independence  was  not  their  motive.  They  did 
not  desire  separation  from  England.  On  the  contrary  the  first 
Continental  Congress  that  assembled,  and  each  succeeding  one, 
until  the  Declaration  was  put  forth,  adopted  an  address  to  the 
Crown,  and  to  the  people,  and  to  the  Parliament  of  England, 
affirming  their  devotion  to  the  British  people,  their  devotion  to 

1  The  Newbern  Daily  Progress,  Newbern,  North  Carolina,  September  5, 
1860. 

276 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS    277 

the  British  constitution,  and  their  loyalty  to  the  Crown  of  England. 
They  did  not  desire  separation  from  the  mother  country.  They 
demanded  a  redress  of  grievances  under  the  British  constitution, 
and  while  they  remained  a  part  of  the  British  Empire.  What  were 
these  grievances?  You  will  find  them  in  the  Bill  of  Rights,  put 
forth  by  the  first  Continental  Congress,  which  assembled  in  1774. 

"In  that  bill  of  rights  the  colonies  proclaimed  to  the  world  their 
desire  to  remain  a  part  of  the  British  Empire  ;  they  acknowledged 
the  right  of  Great  Britain  in  Parliament  to  make  all  laws  which 
affected  the  general  welfare  of  the  Empire,  without  interfering 
with  the  local  and  internal  concerns  of  the  colonies ;  they  acknowl 
edged  the  right  of  the  British  government  to  regulate  foreign 
affairs,  to  make  war  and  peace,  to  regulate  commerce,  and  to  do 
those  things  that  affected  the  general  welfare  of  the  Empire  of 
Britain ;  but  they  declared  in  that  Bill  of  Rights  that  the  colonies 
possessed  the  sole  and  exclusive  power  of  legislating  in  their 
colonial  legislatures  over  their  domestic  policy.  That  was  the 
point  on  which  they  were  prepared  to  sacrifice  life  if  necessary, 
the  right  of  self-government  in  each  colony  so  far  as  affected  their 
local  and  domestic  concerns;  Great  Britain  refused  to  recognize 
that  right,  and  before  our  fathers  would  surrender  it,  they  deter 
mined  that  they  would  resort  to  force  and  even  carry  force  to  the 
point  of  separation  from,  and  an  entire  independence  of  Great 
Britain. 

"It  is  important  to  bear  this  fact  in  mind,  in  order  to  determine 
precisely  the  principles  on  which  our  government  is  founded. 
The  British  Parliament  denied  the  right  of  the  colonies  to  regulate 
their  internal  affairs,  because  they  said  that  those  colonies  pos 
sessed  no  other  rights  than  those  that  the  Prince  of  England  had 
granted  to  them  in  their  charters.  Washington,  Jefferson,  and 
Hancock,  and  the  heroes  of  that  day  told  the  king  that  they  did 
not  get  their  rights  from  the  Crown,  and  they  denied  the  power  of 
the  king  or  of  Parliament  to  take  those  rights  away.  The  colonies 
claimed  that  the  right  of  local  self-government  was  inherent  in 
the  people,  derived  from  the  Ruler  of  the  Universe,  the  only  power 
and  jurisdiction  of  kings  and  Parliaments.  Upon  this  point  the 
Revolution  turned.  This  right  of  local  self-government  as  being 
inherent  in  the  people  was  affirmed  by  the  American  Revolution. 


278  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

The  Constitution,  under  which  we  live,  was  made  for  the  purpose 
of  confirming  and  perpetuating  the  liberties  achieved  by  the  Revo 
lution.  The  question  now  arises  whether  we  will  maintain  at  this 
day  those  principles  for  which  our  fathers  fought  and  which  were 
secured  to  us  by  the  sacrifices  of  the  Revolution. 

"The  abolitionist  party  at  the  North,  some  years  ago,  attempted 
to  violate  this  great  principle  of  self-government  in  the  territories 
of  the  United  States  by  the  application  of  the  Wilmot  Proviso. 
They  introduced  into  Congress  a  law  for  the  purpose  of  prohibiting 
slavery  everywhere  in  the  territories  of  the  United  States,  whether 
the  people  wanted  it  or  not.  The  whole  South,  with  a  large  portion 
of  the  Northern  Democracy,  resisted  the  Wilmot  Proviso  as  a 
violation  of  the  right  of  self-government,  at  the  same  time  that  it 
was  a  usurpation  of  power  by  the  Federal  government.  In  the 
discussion  which  took  place,  we  who  opposed  the  Wilmot  Proviso 
appealed  to  the  Revolutionary  struggle  as  furnishing  the  grounds 
on  which  we  ought  to  resist  the  interference  by  Congress  with  the 
domestic  affairs  of  the  people  of  the  territories.  We  reminded  the 
people  then  that  the  first  serious  point  of  controversy  which  ever 
arose  between  the  American  colonies  and  the  British  government 
was  upon  the  slavery  question. 

"For  more  than  seventy  years  previous  to  the  Declaration  of 
Independence  the  colony  of  Virginia  asserted  her  right  to  control 
the  question  of  slavery  through  her  colonial  legislature.  During 
the  early  portion  of  that  period  the  Virginians  passed  laws  to 
encourage  the  introduction  of  slaves  and  protect  slavery  in  the 
colonies,  but  after  a  while  they  found  the  number  of  slaves  in 
creasing  in  a  greater  ratio  than  the  white  people,  and  being  sur 
rounded  by  large  bands  of  hostile  Indians,  they  became  alarmed 
lest  the  savage  Africans  just  introduced  should  unite  with  the 
savage  Indians  surrounding  the  settlement,  and  exterminate  the 
whites.  In  order  to  prevent  a  calamity  so  fearful,  the  colony  of 
Virginia  passed  laws  adverse  to  the  further  introduction  of  slaves 
into  that  colony.  The  British  merchants  engaged  in  the  African 
slave  trade  then  appealed  to  the  king  to  annul  the  legislation  of 
these  few  adventurers  in  the  colony  of  Virginia.  They  set  forth 
that  they  had  a  right  as  British  subjects  to  move  from  England, 
and  carry  with  them  their  slaves  as  well  as  all  other  property, 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS    279 

and  hold  them  in  the  colonies  without  reference  to  the  legislation 
of  the  colonial  legislatures.  The  king  in  council  sustained  that 
claim,  annulled  the  local  legislation  of  Virginia,  and  instructed 
its  governor  not  to  allow  any  more  laws  to  be  passed  in  the  colony 
adverse  to  the  slave  trade ;  but  as  late  as  1772,  only  four  years 
before  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  the  legislature  of  Vir 
ginia  adopted  a  memorial  to  his  Majesty,  telling  him  that  unless 
he  granted  to  the  colony  of  Virginia  the  right  to  control  this  ques 
tion  according  to  the  interest  of  their  own  people,  he  would  lose 
his  dominions  in  America. 

"Thus  we  find  that  the  controversy  on  the  slave  question  in 
the  territories  began  seventy  years  before  the  Revolutionary  War, 
reached  down  to  the  beginning  of  the  war  itself,  and  led  into  the 
very  contest  that  produced  the  final  separation.  Each  of  the 
other  colonies  passed  laws  also  regulating  the  question  of  slavery. 
You  did  it  in  North  Carolina.  Some  of  your  laws  protected  it, 
some  encouraged  it,  and  others  discouraged  it,  just  as  you  believed, 
or  rather  your  ancestors,  that  the  interests  of  this  colony  required 
at  the  time.  So  it  was  with  each  of  the  New  England  colonies. 
Some  protected  it,  some  invited  it,  others  excluded  it  altogether, 
and  others  regulated  it  with  a  tendency  rather  against  its  encourage 
ment;  but  the  principle  involved  in  that  whole  contest  was  the 
exclusive  right  of  the  people  in  each  colony  in  their  colonial  legis 
lature  to  regulate  all  their  domestic  affairs  to  suit  themselves, 
without  the  interference  of  the  British  government.  I  presume 
that  no  person  present  will  controvert  the  correctness  of  this 
historical  proposition. 

"I  have  resisted  the  Wilmot  Proviso  from  the  time  of  its  first 
introduction  in  Congress  down  to  the  present  day,  upon  the  ground 
that  it  violated  the  principles  upon  which  our  fathers  fought  the 
Revolutionary  War.  (Applause.)  If  British  subjects  in  the 
colonies  before  the  Revolutionary  War  were  entitled  to  the  in 
herent  right  of  self-government  over  their  domestic  affairs,  I 
cannot  see  why  the  same  right  should  not  be  guaranteed  to  the 
people  of  our  territories  since  the  Revolution.  (Applause.)  I 
have  never  claimed  for  the  people  of  the  territories  any  other 
right,  or  higher  right,  than  our  fathers  maintained  at  the  point 
of  the  bayonet  for  the  colonies  prior  to  the  Revolution.  (Ap- 


280  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

plause.)  If  an  American  citizen  of  North  Carolina  moving  to  a 
territory  of  the  United  States,  is  not  entitled  to  as  many  rights  of 
self-government  there  as  a  British  subject  before  the  Revolution, 
let  me  ask,  what  did  you  gain  by  the  sacrifices  of  the  Revolution  ? 
(Applause.) 

"Who  are  the  people  of  the  territories  that  they  are  not  capable 
of  self-government  ?  You  do  not  doubt  that  you  people  of  North 
Carolina  are  entirely  competent  to  make  laws  for  your  own  govern 
ment.  You  do  not  doubt  but  that  the  right  of  self-government 
is  an  inherent  right  in  North  Carolina.  If  it  be  an  inherent  right 
in  this  state,  let  me  ask  you,  when  you  emigrate  to  Kansas,  at  what 
point  of  time  do  you  lose  that  right  ?  Do  you  lose  all  the  sense, 
all  the  intelligence,  all  the  virtue  you  had  on  the  wayside,  while 
emigrating  to  a  territory  of  the  United  States  ?  No  man  doubts 
your  capability  while  you  stay  at  home  to  decide  for  yourselves 
what  kind  of  laws  you  will  have  in  respect  to  negroes,  as  well  as 
to  white  men.  Are  you  any  less  capable  after  you  have  left  your 
native  land  and  gone  to  a  territory? 

"Is  there  anything  in  the  character  of  the  men  who  emigrate 
from  their  native  valleys  to  the  plains  and  prairies  of  the  West 
that  renders  them  less  fit  for  self-government  than  those  who 
remain  where  they  were  born?  Those  of  us  who  in  early  life 
left  the  old  states,  who  penetrated  into  the  wilderness,  secured  our 
homes,  made  our  own  farms,  erected  schoolhouses  and  churches, 
made  our  fences  and  split  our  own  rails  (laughter),  think  that  we 
know  what  kind  of  laws  and  institutions  will  suit  our  interests 
quite  as  well  as  you  who  never  saw  the  country.  (Applause.) 
We  have  quite  as  much  interest  in  the  laws  under  which  we  are  to 
live  as  you  have,  who  never  expect  to  go  to  that  country,  and 
therefore  have  no  concern  about  our  laws.  These  are  the  opinions 
of  a  Northwestern  man ,  a  man  who  has  spent  his  whole  life  on  the 
frontier.  You  cannot  convince  us  that  we  are  not  as  good  as  our 
brothers  who  remain  in  the  old  states.  I  know  there  is  some-, 
thing  in  the  human  mind  that  leads  every  one  to  suppose  that  his 
own  birthplace  is  the  very  center  of  civilization,  and  that  there 
is  nothing  good  beyond  the  range  of  his  infant  vision.  When  I 
was  a  child  I  thought  that  the  mountains  that  surrounded  the 
valley  in  which  I  was  born  were  the  confines  of  civilization ;  and 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS    281 

my  vision  was  limited  by  them ;  and  I  fancied  that  beyond  their 
boundaries  there  was  nothing  but  border  ruffians  and  outside 
barbarians.  When,  however,  I  crossed  them  and  went  into  the 
next  valley,  I  found  there  were  just  as  good  people  there  as  I  had 
left  behind  me,  and  so  with  the  next  and  every  step  I  took,  from 
the  East  toward  the  setting  sun,  I  unloosened  and  shook  off 
unjust  prejudice. 

"  Ignorance  has  fixed  around  other  people  prejudices  similar 
to  those  I  then  had.  We  in  the  Northwest  have  much  more 
respect  for  you  than  you  for  us.  We  love  you  better  than  you 
do  us.  We  love  this  Union  better  than  you  do,  in  consequence 
of  the  circumstances  that  surround  us.  You  go  into  one  of 
our  settlements,  in  Kansas,  Nebraska,  Illinois,  or  any  of  them, 
and  there  you  will  find  that  a  North  Carolinian  has  settled  down 
by  the  side  of  a  Connecticut  farmer,  with  a  Virginian  next  to 
him,  a  New  Yorker,  a  South  Carolinian  and  representatives  from 
every  state  around  him,  the  whole  Union  being  represented  on 
the  prairies  by  the  farmers  who  have  settled  on  it.  In  the  course 
of  time  the  young  people  of  this  society  begin  to  visit,  and  in  a 
little  while  the  North  Carolinian  boy  sees  a  Yankee  girl  he  likes, 
and  his  prejudices  against  her  people  begin  to  soften.  (Laughter.) 
In  a  few  years  the  North  Carolina  and  the  Connecticut  people  are 
united,  the  Virginian  and  the  Pennsylvanian,  the  Yankee  and 
the  slaveholder,  are  united  by  the  ties  of  marriage,  blood,  friend 
ship,  and  social  intercourse ;  and  when  their  children  grow  up, 
the  child  of  the  same  parents  has  a  grandfather  in  North  Carolina 
and  another  in  Vermont ;  and  that  child  does  not  like  to  have 
either  of  those  states  abused.  That  child  has  a  reverence  for  the 
graves  of  his  grandfather  and  his  grandmother  in  the  good  old 
North  state  and  he  has  the  same  reverence  for  the  graves  of  his 
grandfather  and  his  grandmother  in  the  valleys  of  Vermont ;  and 
he  will  never  consent  that  this  Union  shall  be  dissolved  so  that  he 
will  be  compelled  to  obtain  a  passport  and  get  it  viseed  to 
enter  a  foreign  land  to  visit  the  graves  of  his  ancestors.  You  can 
not  sever  this  Union  unless  you  cut  the  heartstrings  that  bind 
father  to  son,  daughter  to  mother,  and  brother  to  sister  in  all  our 
new  states  and  territories.  (Cheers.) 

"Besides  the  ties  of  blood  and  affection  that  bind  us  to  each 


282  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

^l 

of  the  states,  we  have  commercial  intercourse  and  pecuniary  in 
terests  that  we  are  not  willing  to  surrender.  Do  you  think  that  a 
citizen  of  Illinois  will  ever  consent  to  pay  duties  at  the  Custom 
House  when  he  ships  his  commerce  down  the  Mississippi  to  supply 
the  people  below  ?  Never  on  earth.  We  shall  say  to  the  custom 
house  gatekeepers  of  the  Mississippi  River  that  we  furnish  the 
water  that  makes  that  great  river,  and  we  will  follow  it  through 
out  its  whole  course  to  the  ocean,  no  matter  who  or  what  may 
stand  before  us.  ("Good.")  So  with  the  East;  we  are  bound 
to  the  people  of  the  East  by  the  same  ties  of  blood  and  kindred, 
and  you  cannot  sever  this  Union  without  blasting  every  hope  and 
prospect  that  a  Western  man  has  on  this  earth. 

"Then,  having  so  deep  a  stake  in  the  Union,  we  are  determined 
to  maintain  it,  and  we  know  but  one  mode  by  which  it  can  be 
maintained ;  that  is,  to  enforce  rigidly  and  in  faith  every  clause, 
every  line,  every  syllable  of  the  Constitution  as  our  fathers  made 
it  and  bequeathed  it  to  us.  (Cheers.)  We  do  not  stop  to  inquire 
whether  you  here  in  Raleigh  or  the  Abolitionists  in  Maine  like  every 
provision  of  that  Constitution  or  not.  It  is  enough  for  me  that  our 
fathers  made  it.  Every  man  that  holds  office  under  the  Constitu 
tion  is  sworn  to  protect  it.  Our  children  are  brought  up  and 
educated  under  it,  and  they  are  early  impressed  by  the  injunction 
that  they  shall  at  all  times  yield  a  ready  obedience  to  it.  I  am 
in  favor  of  executing  in  good  faith  every  clause  and  provision  of 
the  Constitution  (loud  cheers)  and  of  protecting  every  right  under 
it  (cheers)  and  then  hanging  every  man  who  takes  up  arms  against 
it.  (Cheers.)  Yes,  my  friends,  I  would  hang  every  man  higher 
than  Haman  who  would  attempt  by  force  to  resist  the  execution 
of  any  provision  of  the  Constitution  which  our  fathers  made 
and  bequeathed  to  us.  (Loud  cheers  and  cries,  "That  is  Southern 
enough  for  us,"  etc.)  A  gentleman  behind  me  says  that  that  senti 
ment  is  Southern  enough  for  him  and  for  you.  I  do  not  go  for 
the  Constitution  because  it  is  Southern  or  Northern,  nor  because 
it  is  Eastern  or  Western,  but  I  go  for  it  because  my  allegiance  to 
the  Constitution,  my  oath  and  my  duty,  my  love  for  my  children, 
and  my  hope  of  salvation  in  the  future,  makes  it  my  sacred  and 
bounden  duty  to  vote  for  it  and  maintain  it.  (Cheers  and  cries 
of  "Hurrah  for  Douglas.") 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS    283 

"I  claim  no  rights  for  my  state  that  I  will  not  concede  to  you 
and  defend  for  you  and  the  whole  South  (cheers) ;  I  will  accept  no 
privileges  for  Illinois  that  I  will  not  permit  to  North  Carolina,  and 
I  claim  no  right  in  the  territories  for  my  citizens  or  for  my  property 
that  I  will  not  guarantee  for  every  other  state  in  the  Union.  I 
believe  in  the  absolute  and  unconditional  equality  of  all  the  states 
of  the  Confederacy.  (Applause.)  But  I  claim  that  I  have  the 
right  to  go  to  the  territories  and  carry  my  property  with  me  and 
hold  it  there  and  to  have  it  protected  on  the  same  terms  that  you 
have  in  the  slave  holding  states.  ("Good.")  But  upon  what 
terms,  I  ask,  can  I  carry  my  property  into  the  territories? 

"  I  carry  it  there  subject  to  the  local  law.  If  I  am  a  dealer  in 
cattle,  in  horses,  in  sheep,  in  stock  of  any  kind,  I  carry  my  prop 
erty  subject  to  the  local  law.  If  I  am  a  dealer  in  dry  goods,  I 
go  to  the  territories  subject  to  the  local  law.  If  I  find  the  local 
tax  heavier  on  the  peddlers  than  on  the  local  merchants,  I  must 
either  pay  the  tax  or  quit  peddling.  ("Good.")  If  I  am  a  dealer 
in  groceries  or  liquors,  I  must  carry  my  liquors  there  subject  to 
the  local  law,  and  I  had  better  inquire  what  that  local  law  is  before 
I  start,  and  if  on  inquiry  I  ascertain  that  the  Maine  liquor  law  is 
in  force  there,  I  think  that  I  had  better  carry  my  liquors  some 
where  else  and  seek  a  better  market  for  it.  (Cheers.)  The 
Northern  man  goes  into  the  territories  with  his  property  subject 
to  the  local  laws  of  the  territory  as  the  people  may  have  made 
those  laws  through  their  local  legislatures.  Are  you  not  willing 
to  go  upon  the  same  terms  ?  (Cries,  "We  are  as  willing,"  "We  never 
asked  more.")  Do  you  claim  more  than  is  granted  to  us ?  ("No") 
You  may  go  there  also  and  carry  your  slaves  with  you  subject 
to  the  local  laws,  in  the  same  way  that  I  can  carry  my  goods. 
Equality  of  rights  is  the  principle,  and  obedience  to  the  local  law 
is  the  only  condition  on  which  any  man  can  go  into  the  territories 
of  the  United  States  with  safety. 

"I  know  that  there  is  a  class  of  politicians  who  are  in  the  habit 
of  telling  you  that  Congress  will  not  grant  you  protection  for  your 
slave  property  in  the  territories,  and  Congress  will  not.  When 
did  Congress  ever  pass  a  law  to  protect  any  particular  kind  of 
property  in  the  territories?  Congress  never  yet  passed  a  crim 
inal  code  for  an  organized  territory  on  the  American  continent. 


284  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Murder  is  a  crime  in  the  territories,  not  under  any  act  of  Congress, 
but  under  the  territorial  law.  Horse-stealing  is  a  crime  not  by 
an  act  of  Congress,  but  by  the  territorial  law.  And  so  with  every 
crime  against  the  person  or  the  property  of  a  citizen,  no  matter 
where.  You  are  told  that  this  is  squatter  sovereignty.  Just 
such  squatter  sovereignty  was  established  in  North  Carolina  by 
the  men  who  put  forth  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and 
drove  the  agents  of  George  III  from  the  continent.  It  is  the  simple 
right  of  every  people  to  make  their  own  laws,  and  establish  their 
own  constitutions  according  to  their  own  interests,  without  any 
interference  of  any  person  outside  their  own  borders.  That  is 
all  it  is. 

"Is  not  that  a  sound  principle?  Why,  there  are  two  classes  of 
politicians  who  tell  you  that  it  is  very  unsound.  Who  are  they  ? 
First,  the  Northern  abolitionists  and  the  Black  Republicans 
think  it  very  unsound.  They  assert  that  it  is  the  duty  of  Congress 
to  prohibit  slavery  wherever  the  people  want  it.  That  is  the  doc 
trine  of  the  Abolitionists.  They  are  in  favor  of  Congress  prohibit 
ing  it  wherever  it  is  necessary,  and  they  say  that  wherever  it  is  not 
necessary,  the  people  do  not  want  it,  and  that  the  people  will  ex 
clude  it  themselves.  Here  it  is  only  necessary  to  say  they  are  for 
Congress  to  prohibit  and  exclude  slavery  wherever  the  people  do 
want  it.  There  is  another  class  of  politicians  who  are  in  favor  of 
Congress  interfering  in  favor  of  slavery  wherever  necessary. 
They  are  not  interventionists,  however,  except  when  necessary. 
When  do  they  hold  that  intervention  is  necessary?  Why,  it 
is  clear  that  it  is  unnecessary  to  interfere  to  protect  slavery  where 
the  people  are  in  favor  of  it,  for  in  that  case  they  will  pass  laws  to 
protect  it  themselves.  For  instance,  New  Mexico  was  in  favor 
of  slavery,  and  hence  the  people,  two  years  ago,  passed  a  law  in 
their  local  legislature  establishing  a  very  efficient  slave  code,  pro 
tecting  slavery  in  the  territory.  Hence  it  is  not  necessary  in  the 
estimation  of  the  Southern  Secessionists  to  protect  it  there,  for 
the  people  wanting  it  will  have  it  and  protect  themselves.  It  is 
only  necessary  for  Congress  to  interfere,  they  say,  and  protect 
slavery  where  the  people  do  not  want  it,  and  therefore  will  not 
protect  it  themselves.  Thus  you  find  that  in  this  country  there  are 
two  parties  in  favor  of  Federal  intervention.  The  Black  Repub- 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS    285 

licans  of  the  North  and  the  Secessionists  and  Disunionists  of  the 
South  agree  in  respect  to  the  power  and  duty  of  Congress  to  control 
the  slavery  question  in  the  territories.  They  agree  that  Congress 
may  control  it  and  that  the  people  of  the  territory  ought  not  to  be 
allowed  to  do  so.  Agreeing  thus  far,  they  differ  on  this  point,  as 
to  what  way  Congress  ought  to  control  it.  While  the  Northern 
fanatics  say  that  Congress  ought  to  control  the  question  as  against 
the  South,  the  Southern  Secessionists  say  that  it  must  be  controlled 
as  against  the  North.  Each  party  appeals  to  the  passions,  preju 
dices,  the  ambitions  of  his  own  section,  against  the  peace  and 
harmony  of  the  whole  country. 

"Now,  suppose  you  acquiesced  in  the  demands  of  this  Southern 
Secessionist  party  and  allowed  them  to  rally  all  the  people  of  all 
the  Southern  states  under  a  Southern  intervention  banner,  and 
suppose  we  Democrats  of  the  North  would  be  craven-spirited 
enough  to  yield  to  the  demands  of  a  dominant  majority  in  our 
own  section,  and  join  the  cry  of  Northern  intervention  against 
slavery,  and  rally  every  Northern  man  under  that  banner.  Then 
you  have  two  sections  of  this  Union  separated,  with  a  broad  line 
between  them,  every  Southern  man  on  one  side,  and  every  North 
ern  man  on  the  other,  both  abusing  each  other.  Now,  what  is 
your  Union  worth  after  that  is  accomplished?  Remember  that 
the  Union  cannot  survive  the  affections  of  the  people  on  whom 
it  rests.  Whenever  you  have  alienated  Northern  and  Southern 
men,  whenever  you  have  separated  them  so  far  that  they  cannot 
belong  to  the  same  political  party,  and  the  same  church,  and  cannot 
commune  in  the  House  of  God  at  the  same  communion  table,  your 
Union  is  very  nearly  dissolved.  This  sectionalism  has  reached 
this  point.  It  has  reached  the  House  of  God  and  separated  the 
members  of  the  same  church.  That  good  old  church  in  which 
I  was  born  and  reared,  the  old  church  in  which  my  father  and  my 
mother,  my  grandfather  and  my  grandmother  and  my  ancestors 
for  many  generations  were  in  the  habit  of  communing,  separated 
into  a  church  North  and  South,  and  when  we  travel  from  one  side 
of  the  line  to  the  other,  we  are  not  permitted  to  go  to  the  same 
table.  And  what  has  produced  this  estrangement?  It  is  the 
agitation  of  the  slavery  question  in  the  Halls  of  Congress.  What 
good  has  been  accomplished  for  anybody  by  the  agitation  ?  What 


286  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

41 

benefit  has  been  conferred  on  the  white  man?  what  benefit  has 
been  conferred  on  the  black  man  by  this  agitation  ?  It  has  alien 
ated  friend  from  friend;  you  have  rallied  section  against  section 
by  it ;  you  have  spread  mischief  and  dissensions  and  heartburnings, 
without  any  redeeming  or  corresponding  advantage.  What  is 
the  remedy  for  this  state  of  things?  I  answer,  the  remedy  is 
to  banish  the  slavery  question  from  the  Halls  of  Congress ;  re 
mand  it  to  the  people  of  the  territories  and  of  the  states. 

"  Let  the  people  make  just  such  laws  as  they  choose,  so  that  they 
do  not  violate  the  Constitution  of  the  country.  If  they  should 
pass  a  law  in  violation  of  the  Constitution,  the  Supreme  Court  is 
the  only  tribunal  on  earth  that  can  ascertain  and  decide  that  fact. 
(Applause.)  If  you  go  to  a  territory,  and  when  you  get  there  you 
do  not  like  their  laws,  and  you  think  that  a  particular  statute 
is  unconstitutional,  all  you  have  to  do  is  to  make  out  a  case 
under  the  law  so  as  to  have  the  question  tried  in  the  territorial 
courts,  appeal  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  and  there 
get  your  case  decided,  and  if  that  court  decides  that  the  law  is 
unconstitutional,  there  is  an  end  of  it  —  it  cannot  be  enforced. 
On  the  contrary,  if  it  be  decided  that  the  statute  complained  of 
is  constitutional,  it  must  stand  till  the  people  of  the  territory  get 
tired  of  it,  and  have  sense  enough  to  change  it.  If  the  people  of 
the  territory  make  bad  laws,  let  them  suffer  under  them  till  they 
are  wise  enough  to  make  good  ones.  If  they  make  good  laws, 
let  them  enjoy  all  the  advantages  of  their  good  laws.  Let  us  act 
upon  this  principle,  and  there  will  be  peace  between  the  North 
and  the  South. 

"I  affirm  to  you  that  the  Democratic  party  is  pledged  by  its 
honor,  its  organization,  its  platform,  and  its  principles,  to  this 
doctrine  of  the  nonintervention  of  Congress  with  slavery  in  the 
territories.  (Applause.)  What  man  will  be  bold  enough  to  deny 
that  every  Democrat  in  America  up  to  the  present  hour  was  pledged 
to  the  doctrine  of  nonintervention?  Read  the  platform  of  the 
party  that  nominated  Cass  in  1848,  Pierce  in  1852,  and  Buchanan 
in  1856.  There  you  find  the  doctrine  of  the  nonintervention  of 
Congress  with  slavery  in  the  territories  of  the  United  States.  Is 
not  this  so?  What,  then,  has  produced  this  sudden  change? 
Nonintervention  was  a  good  doctrine  four  years  ago,  interven- 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS    287 

tion  is  necessary  now.  Four  years  ago  there  was  no  intervention 
with  the  slavery  question  in  America,  except  among  the  Black 
Republicans  of  the  North.  I  appeal  to  you,  my  fellow-citizens 
of  North  Carolina,  without  distinction  of  party  to  tell  me  whether 
every  Democratic  speaker  in  the  state  did  not  tell  you  that  your 
rights,  your  honor,  your  equality  in  the  Union,  depended  upon 
maintaining  the  doctrine  of  nonintervention  by  Congress  with 
the  question  of  slavery  as  affirmed  by  the  Democratic  platform? 
Now  they  tell  you,  that  this  doctrine  which  they  taught  you  to 
believe,  and  making  you  to  believe,  to  carry  the  state  by  a  large 
majority  for  Buchanan,  they  now  tell  you  that  this  doctrine, 
taught  and  preached  four  years  ago,  is  little  better  than  Black 
Republicanism.  I  stand  to-day  where  I  stood  when  the  Seces 
sionists  eulogized  me  as  the  best  friend  that  the  South  ever  had. 
(Cries  of  "That's  so.") 

"I  defy  them  to  show  where  I  have  changed  a  hair's  breadth, 
and  when  I  have  heretofore  defied  them  face  to  face  to  show  it, 
the  only  answer  they  could  make  was,  that  I  was  constant  and 
would  not  change.  (Laughter  and  applause.)  No.  I  would  not 
change  merely  because  presidents  and  caucuses,  backed  by  ex 
tensive  patronage,  said  I  must.  (Cries  of  "Good,"  "That's 
right.")  It  is  as  much  my  right  and  duty  to  think  for  myself  as 
it  is  for  the  President  to  do  it  for  himself.  (Cries  of  "Right.") 
I  do  not  recognize  the  right  of  the  Executive  Department  to  inter 
fere  with  the  action  or  speech  of  any  member  of  the  Senate  of  the 
House  of  Representatives.  (Applause.)  So  long  as  the  President 
chooses  to  confine  himself  to  the  performance  of  his  duties  in 
obedience  to  the  Constitution,  I  will  sustain  him  to  the  utmost 
in  the  right  to  free  and  independent  action.  But  whenever  the 
President  is  permitted  to  say  to  the  Senator  or  Representative  of 
a  sovereign  state,  '  Abandon  your  convictions,  betray  your  constit 
uents,  do  as  I  say,  or  I  will  remove  you  from  office  and  behead 
every  friend  you  have  in  office  throughout  the  land ' ;  whenever  it  is 
permitted  to  him  to  do  that  with  impunity,  then  the  Republic  is 
but  a  sham  and  a  mockery.  (Applause.)  There  is  no  freedom, 
there  can  be  no  liberty,  when  the  representative  of  the  people  is 
not  responsible  to  his  constituents  instead  of  to  the  Executive 
power.  ("It  is  despotism.")  Yes,  the  worst  of  all  despotisms 


288  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

is  when  the  Executive  can  say  to  a  man,  '  Violate  your  conscience, 
betray  your  constituents,  and  follow  me,  or  I  will  remove  from 
office  every  friend  you  have  got,  and  defeat  you  at  home  through 
the  Executive  power.7  I  speak  with  some  feeling  on  this  subject. 
(Applause.) 

"I  have  had  some  experience.  I  have  been  under  the  necessity 
in  my  lifetime  of  fighting  Abolitionists  and  Black  Republicans, 
aided  and  supported  by  a  Democratic  administration  with  all  its 
patronage  and  power.  For  three  years  every  Federal  officeholder 
in  Illinois  has  been  required  to  oppose  the  Democratic  and  support 
the  Republican  ticket,  as  a  condition  to  holding  office,  and  even 
yet  in  the  Northern  states,  and  from  one  end  of  the  land  to  the 
other,  every  officeholder  is  removed  unless  he  works  against  the 
regular  organization  of  the  Democratic  party.  You  are  told  now 
that  there  is  a  danger  of  Mr.  Lincoln  being  elected  President  and 
that  his  election  would  be  such  a  calamity  that  it  wrould  become 
your  duty  to  dissolve  the  Union  rather  than  submit  to  his  domina 
tion.  What  hope  of  an  election  has  Mr.  Lincoln  ?  None  on  earth, 
except  through  the  assistance  of  the  seceders  at  Baltimore. 
(Cheers.)  After  I  was  nominated  there  according  to  the  usages 
of  the  party  by  two-thirds  of  all  the  votes  cast,  there  being  present 
two-thirds  of  the  electoral  college  not  objecting,  these  men  bolted 
and  got  up  a  new  convention.  Now,  let  me  ask  you,  is  there  a 
man  in  America  who  doubts  that  I  would  have  beaten  Lincoln, 
if  the  Breckenridge  men  had  acquiesced  in  my  nomination? 
(Applause.)  Nobody  doubts  that  Lincoln  could  never  have 
carried  but  two  states  in  the  Union,  Vermont  and  Massachusetts, 
but  for  that  secession.  What  was  their  object  in  bolting?  Was 
it  not  to  beat  me?  (Cries  of  "Yes.")  If  it  was,  did  they  not 
know  that  the  only  way  to  do  it  was  to  divide  the  Democratic 
party  in  the  North  and  the  South  and  allow  Lincoln  to  carry  each 
one  of  these  states  by  a  minority  vote  ?  The  secession  took  place 
for  the  purpose  of  defeating  me,  and  by  the  division  of  the  party 
electing  Lincoln.  There  was  not  a  man  engaged  in  the  scheme 
who  did  not  expect  that  his  act  was  to  elect  Lincoln.  There  could 
be  no  other  expectation,  no  other  motive,  no  other  hope,  and  I 
never  have  seen  a  man  yet  who  would  risk  his  reputation  by  deny 
ing  that  Lincoln  would  have  been  beaten  but  for  this  division, 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS    289 

and  that  the  danger  of  his  election  grows  out  of  it.  Then  how 
do  they  justify  their  course?  Why,  they  say  that  it  is  better  to 
have  Lincoln  elected  than  Douglas.  Why?  Why,  they  do  not 
like  Douglas.  They  do  not  like  his  platform.  Why  do  they  not 
like  the  platform?  Because  I  stand  now  on  the  very  platform 
on  which  they  stood  four  years  ago.  And  what  confidence  can 
you  have  in  the  integrity,  in  the  truthfulness,  in  the  honor  of  a 
man  who  will  abuse  the  Charleston  platform  now,  after  he  sup 
ported  it  four  years  ago  ?  Wrere  they  cheating  you  then  ?  Were 
they  cheating  you  at  that  time  to  get  your  votes  ?  If  they  were, 
how  much  confidence  should  you  place  in  them  now?  (Cheers.) 
If  they  were  honest  then,  it  does  not  become  them  to  abuse  those 
of  us  who  do  not  change  quite  as  rapidly  as  they  have  done. 
(Applause.) 

"I  stand  now  where  I  stood  then.  I  stand  now  where  I  stood 
when  I  brought  forward  the  bill  to  repeal  the  Missouri  restriction 
and  organize  the  territories  of  Kansas  and  Nebraska.  They  can 
not  and  do  not  pretend  that  I  have  changed.  But  they  have 
started  a  story  I  learn  since  I  got  down  here,  that  I  went  home 
and  explained  the  Nebraska  bill  in  a  different  way  from  what  I 
had  South,  and  said  that  it  was  the  best  abolition  bill  ever  got  up 
to  prohibit  slavery  everywhere.  I  have  tried  to  find  out  where  I 
ever  made  such  a  speech,  but  those  who  made  the  charge  do  not 
name  the  place.  I  now  say  that  no  honest  man  will  ever  make 
the  charge.  (Cheers.)  It  is  an  invention  of  the  enemy,  and  has 
been  circulated  by  the  mean  author  who  knew  it  to  be  false  or  had 
no  reason  for  believing  it  to  be  true.  (Applause.) 

"I  will  tell  you  what  explanation  I  have  made  in  every  North 
ern  state  of  my  motive  for  passing  the  Nebraska  bill,  and  repealing 
the  Missouri  Compromise.  I  have  sustained  that  act,  by  the  argu 
ment  that  if  slavery  was  right  South,  it  was  right  North,  and  if 
it  was  right  to  leave  the  people  to  do  as  they  pleased  South  of  the 
Missouri  Compromise  line,  it  was  right  North  of  the  line.  The 
object  was  to  allow  the  people  to  do  just  as  they  pleased  both 
sides  of  36°  30/  I  assert  that  if  the  people  of  a  territory  want 
slavery,  they  have  a  right  to  have  it,  and  if  they  do  not  wrant  it, 
no  power  on  earth  should  force  it  upon  them.  I  go  farther  and 
say  that  whether  the  people  will  want  it  or  not,  depends  solely 


290  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

upon  the  climate,  the  soil,  the  productions,  and  self-interest  of  the 
people  where  it  exists.  In  the  hot  climate  where  the  people  can 
not  work  in  the  open  sun,  where  rice,  the  cotton  plant,  and  sugar 
cane  flourish,  you  must  have  negro  slaves  to  work  there  or  you 
must  abandon  the  country  to  the  crocodile.  In  a  cold  climate 
where  you  have  almost  perpetual  snow,  and  where  the  negro 
could  not  produce  by  his  labor  half  as  much  as  would  feed  and 
clothe  him  and  furnish  him  wood  enough  to  bake  his  hoe  cake  at 
night,  you  cannot  force  slavery  to  exist,  because  it  will  not  pay 
for  itself.  Slavery,  therefore,  does  not  depend  on  the  law.  It  is 
governed  by  climate,  soil,  and  productions,  by  political  economy, 
and  you  might  as  well  attempt  to  pass  laws  by  Congress  compell 
ing  cotton  to  grow  on  the  summit  of  the  Rocky  Mountains  or  rice 
to  flourish  on  the  granite  hills  of  New  Hampshire  (laughter  and 
applause)  as  slavery  to  exist  where  it  cannot  possibly  exist.  (Ap 
plause.)  I  tell  you  that  wherever  climate  renders  slavery  neces 
sary,  there  it  will  go,  and  furthermore,  the  people  of  a  territory 
will  be  the  first  to  introduce  it  and  pass  all  laws  for  its  protection, 
but  wherever  climate  renders  it  unprofitable  and  no  money  can 
be  made  out  of  it,  there  you  cannot  force  it  to  go.  I  care  not  how 
many  laws  you  have,  or  how  many  armies  to  enforce  these  laws. 
Hence  I  said  in  my  Freeport  speech  that  no  matter  how  the  court 
might  decide  the  abstract  question,  that  practically  slavery  would 
not  go  where  the  people  do  not  want  it,  for  it  would  not  be  prac 
ticable.  That  is  what  I  said  and  that  is  all  I  said  and  that  has 
been  tortured  into  a  declaration  that  I  would  not  obey  the  decision 
of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States.  I  like  to  be  charitable, 
but  I  have  not  sufficient  charity  to  believe  that  he,  let  him  be 
who  he  may,  who  has  represented  me  as  saying  I  would  not  obey 
the  Dred  Scott  decision,  or  any  other  decision  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  did  not  know  that  he  was  perverting  and  misrepresenting 
my  whole  idea.1  (Applause.) 

"I  have  made  more  speeches  than  any  living  man  in  defense  of 
the  Dred  Scott  decision  as  pronounced  by  the  court,  and  I  am  as 
ready  as  any  man  to  enforce  the  decrees  of  the  court  and  to  put  the 
halter  around  the  neck  of  all  men  who  wish  to  resist  the  consti 
tuted  authorities  of  the  land.  (Applause,  and  "Hurrah  for  Doug- 
1For  Douglas'  words  at  Freeport,  see  pp.  97-98. 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS    291 

las.")  I  do  not  desire  to  be  misunderstood  on  these  questions.  lam 
being  hunted  down  by  a  body  of  men  who  four  years  ago  endorsed 
me,  every  man  of  them,  knowing  that  I  held  the  same  opinions 
then  that  I  do  now.  There  is  not  a  living  man  with  intelligence 
enough  to  venture  away  from  home  alone  who  does  not  know  that 
I  have  held  these  sentiments  for  years.  ("Good,"  laughter  and 
applause.)  I  have  come  down  here  now  to  meet  you  face  to  face 
and  to  utter  these  opinions  just  as  I  uttered  them  in  the  North 
ern  states;  and  in  order  to  prevent  them  from  misrepresenting 
me  any  more  I  have  invited  a  friend  of  mine  to  take  down  every 
word  and  syllable  as  it  falls  from  my  lips  and  without  any  revision 
or  my  seeing  it  to  hand  it  over  to  your  papers  here,  if  they  will 
publish  it,  in  order  that  the  people  of  the  North  and  the  South 
may  see  whether  I  do  not  explain  my  doctrines  in  the  South  pre 
cisely  as  I  have  explained  them  in  the  North." 

A  voice.    "We  have  no  organ  here  but  one." 

Douglas.  "It  is  stated  that  my  friends  have  no  organ  here 
but  one. 

"I  do  not  care  how  often  I  may  make  speeches  in  the  Senate 
correcting  the  misapprehensions,  they  are  never  published  here. 
Why?  Certain  gentlemen  have  made  charges  to  the  contrary 
and  it  would  convict  them  if  it  acquitted  me.  I  hold  no  opinions 
of  these  public  questions  that  I  wish  to  conceal  anywhere,  for  I 
hold  that  so  long  as  we  live  under  a  constitution,  which  is  common 
to  all  the  states  of  the  Union,  any  political  creed  is  radically  wrong 
that  cannot  be  avowed  alike  in  all  the  states  of  the  Union. 

"Why  cannot  you  of  the  South  and  of  the  North  live  in  peace 
together  under  this  Constitution,  as  our  fathers  made  it?  The 
only  reason  is  that  there  is  an  attempt  to  create  uniformity  through 
the  action  of  the  Federal  government  in  the  local  and  domestic 
institutions  of  the  states.  Mr.  Abraham  Lincoln,  now  the  Black 
Republican  candidate  for  the  presidency,  when  some  two  years 
ago  a  candidate  for  the  United  States  Senate  against  me,  com 
menced  his  opening  speech  with  this  proposition.  I  will  try  to 
give  his  precise  language  or  as  near  as  I  can  from  recollection, 
and  I  believe  I  have  quoted  the  passage  a  thousand  times.  He 
said  that  '  a  house  divided  against  itself  cannot  stand,  this  govern 
ment  divided  into  free  and  slave  states  cannot  permanently  en- 


292  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

dure,  that  either  slavery  must  be  extended  to  all  the  states,  or  it 
must  be  placed  in  the  course  of  ultimate  extinction  in  all  the  states ; 
they  must  become  all  free  or  all  slave/ 

"Now  that  was  his  proposition.  I  replied  to  that  speech  the 
moment  I  got  home.  I  took  bold  issue  with  him  and  made  the 
canvass  of  Illinois  on  that  proposition  and  one  other.  The  other 
was,  he  assailed  the  Supreme  Court  decision  in  the  Dred  Scott 
case,  and  I  defended  it.  These  were  the  two  issues  upon  which 
we  fought  that  battle.  Mr.  Seward  made  his  celebrated  Roches 
ter  speech  four  months  afterwards,  in  which  he  put  forth  his 
doctrine  of  the  irrepressible  conflict,  borrowing  it  from  Lincoln, 
who  was  the  author  and  the  enunciator  of  that  principle,  that 
the  Union  cannot  exist  divided  into  free  and  slave  states,  but  must 
become  all  free  or  all  slave.  The  Black  Republican  party  is  based 
upon  the  principle  of  making  them  all  free  states ;  the  Secession 
party  is  based  on  the  theory  that  the  territories  and  consequently 
the  states  must  be  all  slave,  whether  the  people  want  them  so  or 
not.  I  hold  to  the  doctrine  that  uniformity  in  domestic  institu 
tions  of  the  different  states  is  neither  possible  nor  desirable.  Slav 
ery  must  be  good  in  one  place  and  bad  in  another ;  it  may  be  neces 
sary  in  one  state  and  unnecessary  in  another.  And  so  with  every 
other  domestic  institution.  Our  fathers  knew  when  they  made 
this  government  that  in  a  country  as  broad  as  this,  with  such  a 
variety  of  soil,  of  climate,  and  of  productions,  there  must  necessa 
rily  be  a  corresponding  variety  of  interests,  requiring  separate  and 
different  laws  in  each  locality.  They  knew  that  the  laws  which 
would  suit  the  granite  hills  of  New  Hampshire  would  be  unsuited 
to  the  rice  and  tobacco  plantations  of  the  Carolinas.  They  knew 
that  the  regulations  necessary  in  a  mining  district  like  California 
would  be  unsuited  to  the  wheat  and  corn  fields  of  Illinois.  Hence 
they  provided  that  each  state  should  retain  its  own  sovereignty, 
in  order  that  each  might  have  just  such  laws  as  it  chose.  This 
right,  therefore,  of  each  state  to  have  different  laws  from  every 
other  one,  lies  at  the  very  foundation  of  our  government.  Uni 
formity,  regardless  of  the  wants  and  the  conditions  of  the  people, 
is  the  worst  possible  despotism  you  can  inflict  on  any  people. 

"Well,  the  Abolitionists  of  the  North  and  the  Secessionists  of  the 
South  admit  that  this  doctrine  of  the  right  of  each  state  to  regulate 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS    293 

and  decide  for  itself  is  a  good  doctrine  in  the  states,  but  will  not 
do  in  the  territories.  They  admit  that  in  the  states  you  have  an 
inherent  right  to  govern  yourselves,  but  lose  it  when  you  go  to 
the  territories.  Why  not  allow  a  territory  to  do  it  as  well  as  a 
state?  Why,  they  tell  you  that  a  territory  is  not  a  sovereign 
power,  and  therefore  cannot  do  it;  that  none  but  sovereign 
powers  have  a  right  of  self-government.  Our  fathers  of  the  Revo 
lution  did  not  think  so.  The  Revolutionary  struggle  began  in 
the  defense  of  the  right  of  the  dependent  colonies,  dependent 
territories,  dependent  provinces,  to  exercise  this  right  of  self- 
government  as  well  as  sovereign  states.  None  of  the  Tories  of 
the  Revolution  ever  contended  before  that  the  right  of  self-govern 
ment  was  to  be  restricted  to  sovereign  states.  George  III  and 
Lord  North,  his  minister,  and  his  Tory  friends,  on  the  continent, 
all  denied  the  right  of  the  people  of  these  colonies  to  regulate 
their  own  domestic  affairs.  They  all  said  that  the  people  of  the 
colonies  had  no  rights  except  those  the  king  granted  them  in  the 
charters.  The  same  old  doctrine.  Our  fathers  of  the  Revolution 
told  the  king  that  they  did  not  get  their  rights  from  the  king,  but 
they  got  them  from  God  Almighty.  And  the  people  of  the  terri 
tories  will  be  likely  to  tell  you  that  they  do  not  get  their  rights 
from  Congress,  they  get  them  from  a  purer  source.  (Laughter.) 
From  what  I  have  said  you  will  see  that  unless  I  am  right  in  main 
taining  this  principle  of  self-government  for  the  people  of  the  terri 
tories,  our  fathers  in  the  Revolution  must  have  been  wrong  in  that 
struggle.  There  is  no  other  argument  used  against  squatter 
sovereignty,  as  they  term  it,  that  they  have  not  copied  from  the 
Tories  of  the  Revolution,  in  almost  its  identical  language.  (Ap 
plause.)  But  of  course  these  gentlemen  are  very  sincere  in  de 
nouncing  this  doctrine  of  the  noninterference  of  Congress.  I  wish 
they  had  been  frank  enough  to  denounce  it  before  they  had  joined 
me  in  helping  to  sustain  it.  They  knew  when  they  adopted  the 
Cincinnati  platform  that  this  was  the  doctrine.  Read  the  plat 
form.  It  declares  in  so  many  words,  no  interference  by  Congress 
with  slavery  in  the  states  and  territories. 

"At  Charleston  every  friend  I  had  from  the  Northwest  offered 
to  take  the  Cincinnati  platform,  word  for  word,  as  it  read.  They 
said  it  was  not  good  Democracy.  How  came  that  platform  to 


294  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


• 


be  adopted  in  1856,  if  it  was  not  sound  ?  You  know  it  was  adopted 
at  the  suggestion  of  the  Alabama  legislature,  on  four  propositions 
drawn  by  Mr.  Yancey,  and  when  introduced  into  the  Cincinnati 
convention  received  the  vote  of  every  delegate  from  every  state 
in  the  Union,  free  and  slave.  They  proposed  it  and  we  of  the  North 
said  it  was  fair  and  just,  and  we  took  it.  It  was  adopted  by  a 
unanimous  vote,  and  four  years  after  you  are  told  that  a  man  is 
a  traitor  to  the  South  who  stands  by  the  pledge  we  all  made  at 
Cincinnati.  There  is  something  strange  about  this.  I  cannot 
change  as  rapidly  as  that.  (Applause.) 

"If  the  Democratic  party  would  stand  now  where  they  did  then, 
there  would  be  no  trouble.  In  order  to  get  out  of  the  scrape, 
these  men  have  turned  round  and  charged  me  with  having  said 
I  would  not  stand  by  the  Dred  Scott  decision.  I  tell  them  now 
that  any  man  who  makes  that  charge  hereafter  will  know  that  he 
is  falsifying  the  truth.  Then  where  is  the  cause  of  the  trouble 
in  the  Democratic  party?  It  is  an  attempt  to  introduce  a  new 
article  of  faith  into  the  Democratic  creed,  in  direct  violation  of 
the  former  creed  of  the  party.  It  is  an  attempt  again  to  introduce 
this  slavery  question  into  the  Halls  of  Congress,  and  have  Con 
gress  decide  it.  So  long  as  that  question  remains  in  Congress, 
there  will  never  be  peace ;  and  if  we  expect  to  live  together,  we 
must  agree  to  banish  this  whole  subject  from  Congress,  remand  it 
to  the  people  interested  in  it,  and  let  the  Supreme  Court  explain 
the  Constitution  in  reference  to  each  case  as  it  arises ;  then  we  will 
have  peace." 

A  gentleman.  "  There  is  in  the  minds  of  a  large  portion  of  the 
people  of  the  Southern  states  an  apprehension  that  the  purpose  of 
a  certain  class  of  extinct  politicians  of  the  South,  is  to  provoke 
a  division  of  the  Democratic  party  upon  this  question  of  the 
platform  for  the  purpose  of  electing  Lincoln,  and  thereby  without 
any  overt  act  on  his  part,  effect  a  dissolution  of  the  Union.  I 
desire  to  ask  Judge  Douglas  respectfully  to  give  to  the  audience 
all  the  evidence  he  has  in  reference  to  the  purposes  of  these  parties, 
and  as  we  have  heard  that  he  was  called  out  at  Norfolk,  by  an 
elector  on  the  seceders'  ticket,  to  give  his  opinions  as  to  his  course 
as  a  Senator  in  the  event  of  such  dissolution,  we  desire  him  to  re 
peat  it  here,  as  we  intend  to  ask  Mr.  Breckenridge  what  his  course 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS    295 

would  be  also,  being  a  Senator  of  the  United  States  after  the  4th 
of  March,  1861."  l 

Mr.  Douglas.  "  Upon  the  point  presented  in  the  first  suggestion  : 
I  have  no  evidence  in  respect  to  the  designs  and  purposes  of  the 
seceders,  which  I  am  at  liberty  to  use,  except  that  which  is  known 
to  the  whole  world.  I  know  that  Lincoln  has  no  shadow  of  a 
chance  of  being  elected,  unless  the  Breckenridge  men  succeed  in 
dividing  the  Democratic  party,  and  thereby  electing  him  through 
a  minority  vote.  (Cries  of  "  That's  so.")  Supposing  that  I  should 
decline  to-day,  no  man  believes  that  Breckenridge  could  be  elected. 
Supposing  on  the  other  hand,  that  Breckenridge  declines  to-day, 
no  man  doubts  but  I  would  be  elected.  Why,  then,  is  he  keeping 
the  track,  unless  it  is  that  Lincoln  may  be  elected  ?  Then  the  first 
time  I  place  my  foot  on  Virginia  soil  in  this  canvass,  I  am  asked 
by  the  head  man  on  the  electoral  ticket,  the  man  who  leads  the 
ticket,  whether  in  the  event  of  Lincoln  being  elected,  the  Southern 
states  would  be  justified  in  a  dissolution  of  the  Union ;  and  whether 
I  would  go  in  for  enforcing  the  law  in  the  event  of  the  Southern 
states  seceding  ?  A  good  many  present  at  the  time  said  that  I 
ought  not  to  answer  the  question,  because  the  gentleman  was 
opposed  to  me,  and  that  under  the  circumstances  it  was  discour 
teous  for  him  to  propound  such  a  question.  I  told  them  I  was 
ready  to  answer  it.  I  told  them  that  in  my  opinion,  the  election 
of  any  man  according  to  the  forms  and  provisions  of  the  Constitu 
tion,  is  no  excuse  for  dissolving  this  glorious  Union.  (Applause.) 
I  would  regard  the  election  of  Lincoln  as  a  great  calamity,  to  be 
avoided  by  all  honorable  means  by  patriotic  men,  North  and 
South.  But  I  will  not  consent  that  the  mere  act  of  the  election 
of  an  unworthy  man,  or  a  worthy  one  either,  by  the  people,  accord 
ing  to  the  forms  of  the  Constitution,  is  any  excuse  or  justification 
for  breaking  up  this  Union  of  states.  (Applause.)  On  the  other 
hand,  I  said  then  what  I  say  to  you  now,  that  I  am  in  favor  of  the 
enforcement  of  the  law,  under  all  circumstances  and  in  every  con 
tingency.  (Applause.)  If  Lincoln  should  be  elected  President 
for  the  United  States,  or  Breckenridge,  and  any  man,  after  such 
election,  should  attempt  to  violate  the  Constitution  of  the  country, 
or  infringe  on  any  law  or  right  under  it,  I  would  hang  him  higher 
1  For  the  Norfolk  questions,  see  pp.  180-181. . 


296  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

than  Haman,  according  to  law.  (Great  applause.)  I  would  have 
no  more  hesitation  in  hanging  such  a  man  than  Virginia  felt  on 
hanging  John  Brown  when  he  invaded  her  dominion.  (Applause.) 
I  do  not  think  it  would  do  the  country  any  harm  to  try  an  experi 
ment  of  the  kind.  (Laughter.)  We  have  already  demonstrated 
to  the  world  that  we  are  the  greatest  nation  in  the  world  in 
many  respects ;  we  grow  faster  than  any  other  people,  we  spread 
wider  and  more  rapidly,  and  we  annexed  all  countries  adjoining 
to  us  with  gre'ater  speed  than  can  be  done  by  any  other  people ; 
besides  we  can  whip  all  we  come  in  contact  with.  We  are  become 
a  model  for  the  friends  of  liberty  throughout  the  world,  arid  we 
are  the  admiration  of  all  who  love  free  institutions,  while  we  are 
the  terror  of  all  tyrants.  (Applause.)  We  have  demonstrated 
our  great  national  wealth,  our  military  power  and  progress.  We 
have  proved  our  commercial  power  and  productive  capacity; 
but  there  is  one  thing  remaining  to  be  done  to  prove  us  capable 
of  meeting  any  emergency,  whenever  any  emergency  arises.  I 
trust  that  the  government  will  show  that  it  is  strong  enough  to 
execute  that  final  act,  that  is,  to  hang  all  traitors  before  it  thinks 
of  dissolving  this  glorious  Union.  (Applause.)  If  a  bad  man, 
or  a  dangerous  man,  or  a  fanatic  should  be  made  President  of  the 
United  States,  sustain  the  government,  preserve  the  Union,  stand 
by  the  enforcement  of  the  laws,  see  that  they  are  submitted  to 
and  obeyed ;  and  hang  the  man  who  refuses.  (Applause.) 

"It  will  not  do  for  these  gentlemen  to  get  up  a  program,  if  not 
designedly,  yet  knowingly  leading  inevitably  to  the  election  of 
Lincoln,  and  then  to  come  and  ask  me  to  help  them  dissolve  the 
Union  because  they  elected  him.  If  Lincoln  is  elected  and  does 
not  give  the  seceders  all  the  fat  offices  in  the  government,  I  say 
that  he  will  be  the  most  ungrateful  wretch  that  ever  lived.  (Laugh 
ter  and  applause;  the  repetition  of  the  sentence  was  called  for,  and 
when  given,  was  received  with  fresh  applause.)  I  never  would  re 
ceive  such  support  from  a  body  of  men  without  acknowledging  it 
afterwards.  (Laughter.)  I  hope  my  friend  is  satisfied  on  this  point. 

"I  have  been  talking  at  random,  taking  up  these  topics  as  they 
occurred,  changing  the  threads  of  my  discourse  as  suggestions  were 
made  or  questions  proposed;  for  my  object  has  been  to  answer 
frankly  all  the  points  on  which  my  enemies  have  been  attacking 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS    297 

me.  I  did  not  come  here  to  solicit  your  votes.  I  have  nothing  to 
say  for  myself  or  my  claims  personally.  I  am  one  of  those  who 
think  that  it  would  not  be  a  favor  to  me  to  be  made  President  at 
this  time.  Not  that  I  underrate  the  honor  and  the  dignity  of  that 
high  office,  but  I  believe  that  I  can  render  my  country  as  much 
service  while  I  am  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  for  the  next 
four  years.  I  can  there  make  as  much  reputation  for  myself  as 
in  the  presidential  chair,  and  if  any  attempt  be  made  at  disunion, 
leave  a  record  to  my  children  of  which  they  will  be  more  proud 
than  they  would  be  of  my  election  to  the  Chief  Magistracy  of  this 
glorious  Republic.  (Applause.)  And  hence  my  object  in  visiting 
the  South  is  to  explain  how  it  is  that  these  feelings  of  fraternity 
and  kindness  and  brotherly  love  have  been  severed,  and  hostile, 
sectional  parties  organized  in  their  places.  I  desire  to  know  if 
there  is  not  some  common  ground  on  which  all  constitution-loving 
men  may  rally  and  unite  in  putting  down  Northern  Abolitionists 
and  Southern  Secessionists.  (A  voice,  "There  is.")  I  desire  to 
know  whether  the  old  Democratic  masses  are  not  content  to  stand 
by  their  time-honored  organization,  by  their  time-honored  plat 
form,  by  their  time-honored  principles,  to  save  the  Union  now 
as  we  have  saved  it  on  so  many  occasions  before.  (Applause.) 
I  tell  you  that  intervention  by  Congress  means  disunion,  I  care 
not  whence  it  comes,  whether  from  the  North  or  from  the  South. 
(Applause.)  I  have  too  much  respect  for  the  intellect  of  all  the 
interventionists,  to  believe  that  any  one  of  them  thinks  that  the 
Union  could  exist  unless  through  the  doctrine  of  nonintervention. 
"In  1850  the  agitators  of  the  North  and  the  agitators  of  the 
South  got  up  similar  trouble  to  the  one  that  now  threatens  us. 
The  Northern  free  soilers  demanded  the  Wilmot  Proviso  prohibit 
ing  slavery  wherever  the  people  wanted  it.  Yancey  at  the  head 
of  the  fire  eaters  of  the  South  demanded  that  Congress  should 
protect  slavery  wherever  the  people  did  not  want  it.  The  issue 
then  is  precisely  the  issue  now.  The  issue  was  pushed  then  as  it 
is  now,  pertinaciously  pushed  till  the  best  men  in  the  country 
became  alarmed,  lest  this  glorious  Union  should  fall  a  sacrifice  to 
faction.  Even  the  great  Clay  who  had  performed  his  glorious 
mission  on  earth,  and  who  had  retired  to  the  shades  of  Ashland 
to  prepare  for  another  world,  in  his  retirement  heard  the  harsh 


298  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

4fc 

and  discordant  notes  of  discord  and  sectional  strife,  and  rousing 
himself,  came  forth  from  his  retirement  and  resumed  his  seat  in 
the  Senate,  that  great  theater  of  his  great  deeds,  to  see  if  he  could 
not  do  something  to  restore  peace  to  a  distracted  country.  Union 
Whigs  and  Union  Democrats  assembled  together  every  morning 
with  Clay  in  the  chair,  Cass  upon  his  right,  and  Webster  upon  his 
left,  to  see  if  by  united  council  we  could  not  devise  some  scheme 
to  put  down  the  Southern  sectionalism  and  the  Northern  abolition 
ism,  and  restore  peace  to  the  country.  Now  you  are  all  aware 
that  the  Compromise  measures  of  1850  were  the  results  of  the 
councils.  They  were  the  joint  work  of  the  Union  men  of  the 
country,  without  reference  to  politics.  The  measures  adopted 
passed  despite  the  joint  efforts  of  all  the  disunionists  and  other 
patriotic  men  who  had  hoped  something  better  than  compromise 
might  be  adopted.  But  you  all  know  that  the  compromise 
measures  were  adopted,  and  that  they  were  based  on  the  principle 
of  the  nonintervention  by  Congress  with  slavery  in  the  territories. 
The  Compromise  measures  of  1850,  rejecting  the  Wilmot  Pro 
viso  on  the  one  hand,  and  intervention  on  the  other,  rejected  both, 
and  banished  the  slavery  question  from  the  Halls  of  Congress, 
and  referred  it  to  the  people  to  do  as  they  pleased.  In  1852, 
when  the  Whigs  assembled  in  national  convention  for  the  last  time, 
and  nominated  Scott  for  the  presidency,  they  affirmed  the  same 
principles  of  nonintervention.  When  the  Democrats  assembled 
at  the  same  place  and  nominated  Pierce,  we  affirmed  the  same 
principle  of  nonintervention  by  Congress  with  slavery  in  the  terri 
tories.  But  when  we  got  to  Baltimore  in  convention,  wre  found 
there  all  the  seceders,  who  with  Seward  and  Sumner,  had  attempted 
to  defeat  the  Compromise  measures.  They  came  and  asked  us 
to  receive  them  back  into  the  Democratic  party.  We  told  them 
that  we  would  attempt  to  take  them  back  on  the  condition  that 
they  renounce  their  opposition  to  the  doctrine  of  noninterven 
tion  and  stand  by  the  principle  in  the  future.  They  agreed  to 
do  it,  and  we  received  them  back,  and  the  convention  unanimously 
affirmed  the  Compromise  measures.  Hence  every  Democrat 
in  America  in  1852  by  his  vote  for  Pierce  affirmed  the  doctrine  of 
nonintervention  just  as  we  hold  it  and  understand  it  now,  and 
every  Whig  in  America  meant  the  same  thing  by  his  platform. 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  STEPHEN  A.  DOUGLAS    299 

"In  1856  the  same  principle  was  affirmed  again.  Buchanan 
accepted  the  office  on  that  principle.  In  his  letter  of  acceptance 
he  went  the  full  length  of  squatter  sovereignty.  He  said  that  the 
people  of  a  territory,  like  those  of  a  state,  should  decide  for  them 
selves  whether  slavery  should  be  or  should  not  be  excluded  within 
their  limits.  Breckenridge  pledged  himself  to  the  same  thing 
in  his  Lexington  speech  accepting  the  nomination  to  the  vice 
presidency.  Every  Democrat  should  know  that  the  party  was 
pledged  to  that  doctrine  then.  Now  you  find  that  the  old  Seces 
sionists  of  1850  are  trying  to  play  the  same  game  over  again,  under 
the  same  leader  for  demanding  intervention.  Yancey  was  the 
leader  then  as  he  is  now,  with  the  same  object  in  view  now  that 
he  had  then.  The  question  is,  Are  we  going  to  permit  them, 
permit  these  interventionists,  North  and  South,  to  alienate  the 
people  and  break  up  the  Union  ?  I  tell  you  it  never  shall  be  done 
if  I  can  prevent  it.  (Applause.)  I  love  my  children  but  I  do 
not  desire  to  see  them  survive  this  Union.  I  know  of  but  one 
mode  of  preserving  the  Union.  That  is  to  fight  against  all  dis- 
unionists.  Beat  them  for  the  legislature ;  beat  them  for  Congress ; 
beat  them  for  governor;  beat  them  for  President  (cheers)  and 
teach  them  to  love  the  Union  at  the  same  time  that  they  say  the 
Lord's  Prayer.  (Applause.)  Then  we  will  have  peace.  The 
only  mistake  we  Democrats  made  was  in  tolerating  disunionist 
sentiments  in  our  bosoms  so  long.  We  never  ought  to  have  re 
ceived  them  back  when  they  went  into  the  disunionist  movement 
of  1850.  Being  back,  some  of  them  have  become  good  citizens. 
We  shall  stand  by  them,  but  we  shall  apply  the  rigor  of  the  law 
against  every  man  that  raises  his  hand  against  the  peace  and  har 
mony  of  the  country.  Why  should  we  not  live  together  now  as 
our  fathers  did  when  they  made  the  government?  At  the  time 
of  the  Revolution  Southern  men  were  led  to  battle  by  Northern 
generals,  and  North  Carolina  bore  bloody  evidences  of  her  gal 
lantry  at  such  times,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  Northern  troops 
were  led  to  battle  by  Southern  generals.  There  was  no  sectional 
strife  in  Washington's  camp.  Then  Northern  men  and  Southern 
men  shed  their  blood  in  a  common  cause  on  the  same  battlefield 
in  order  that  they  might  transmit  to  their  posterity  a  glorious 
inheritance.  (Applause.)  Now  when  you  tell  me  that  you  are 


300  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

going  to  divide  the  Union,  I  ask  where  you  will  run  your  line? 
Will  you  run  it  between  the  graves  of  your  ancestors?  Are  you 
going  to  separate  the  father  from  the  son?  the  brother  from  the 
sister  ?  the  daughter  from  the  mother  ?  What  are  you  going  to 
do  with  the  glories  of  Bunker  Hill,  Yorktown,  Saratoga,  and  King's 
Mountain?  Are  you  going  to  divide  them,  too?  It  is  a  sacri 
lege  to  talk  about  disunion.  (Applause.)  Let  us  obey  the  law, 
obey  the  Constitution,  perform  our  duties  under  it,  and  then  com 
pel  every  man  to  yield  obedience  to  it. 

"I  thank  you  very  kindly  for  the  attention  with  which  you  have 
listened  to  me.  I  appreciate  the  compliment  which  this  large 
concourse  of  people,  assembled  under  such  circumstances,  implies. 
I  shall  depart  from  North  Carolina  as  I  did  on  many  occasions 
before,  with  my  heart  full  of  gratitude  for  your  kindness  and  for 
the  favors  you  have  bestowed  upon  me.  I  shall  anxiously  desire 
to  return  at  some  future  time  and  renew  my  acquaintance  with 
you." 


APPENDIX  D 

BRECKENRIDGE  CAMPAIGN  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L. 
YANCEY,  NEW  YORK,  NEW  YORK,  OCTOBER  10, 
I8601 

"FELLOW-CITIZENS  of  New  York,  I  trust  that  an  Alabamian  may 
yet  speak  to  the  citizens  of  New  York  in  the  language  of  fellowship. 
I  trust  that  the  hour  is  not  yet  arrived  in  which,  when  an  Ala 
bamian  speaks  to  his  brothers  of  the  city  and  the  state  of  New 
York  as  brothers  it  will  be  a  subject  of  jeering  and  hissing.  We 
ought  to  be  brothers,  if  we  are  not.  There  ought  to  be  a  brother 
hood  of  citizenship  throughout  this  vast  country  which  would 
knit  together  its  social  and  business  relations  in  bonds  so  strong 
that  the  fanatics  of  the  whole  world  could  not  burst  them.  (Loud 
cheers.) 

"I  am  not  unaware,  gentlemen,  of  the  delicate  position  which 
a  speaker  from  the  far  South  occupies,  who  in  this  hour  of  an 
excited  political  canvass,  undertakes  to  speak  in  one  of  the  North 
ern  states,  words  of  truth  and  justice  for  his  section.  (Cheers.) 
But  I  believe,  my  countrymen,  that  truth  and  frankness  will  win 
their  way  at  all  times  to  hearts  that  are  swayed  by  truth,  by  gen 
erosity  and  by  justice.  (Applause.)  I  do  not  disguise  from  you 
—  I  would  not  have  it  otherwise —  that  I  speak  to  you  here  to 
night  as  a  Southern  man.  I  speak  to  you  here  to-night  for  the 
home  that  I  love  better  than  any  other  home,  for  the  state  that 
I  love  better  than  any  other  state,  for  the  section  that  I 
love  better  than  any  other  section  (cheers),  my  own,  and  surely 
it  may  not  be  amiss  to  speak  these  words  in  this  spirit  to  a  brave 
people  who  love  their  own  homes  and  their  own  state,  and  their 
own  section  better  than  they  do  others.  But  I  trust  they  have, 
and  I  desire  to-night  to  inculcate  in  their  bosoms  that  they  shall 

irTiie  New  York  Herald,  October  11,  1860. 
301 


302  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

4p 

have  a  respect  and  a  loyalty  and  an  allegiance  to  the  common 
law  and  bond  that  binds  us  together  in  one  Union.  (Applause.) 
I  feel,  too,  the  difficulty  in  addressing  a  popular  audience  in  this 
canvass  in  any  other  strains  than  as  the  advocate  of  the  election  of 
Breckenridge  and  Lane,  whose  friend  I  am.  (Cheers.)  But, 
my  countrymen,  events  have  happened,  the  wires  are  bringing 
to  us  the  news  now  that  the  great  state  of  Pennsylvania,  to  which 
good  and  conservative  men  have  looked  for  safety  in  this  canvass, 
has  given  way,  and  is  about  to  cast  its  vote  for  a  sectional  candidate 
on  a  great  issue,  a  candidate  all  of  whose  sentiments  are  at  war 
with  the  Constitution  of  the  country.1  I  therefore  feel  it  my  duty 
to-night  to  try  to  rise  above  any  party  aspects  of  these  questions. 
These  aspects,  great  and  interesting  as  they  are  at  all  times,  sink 
into  insignificance  beside  that  other  question  that  has  arisen 
yesterday  and  to-day,  if  it  did  not  exist  before,  our  loyalty  to  an 
endangered  Union  under  the  Constitution.  Therefore,  passing 
aside  the  mere  claims  of  men,  passing  aside  these  mere  questions 
of  party  politics,  and  endeavoring  to  rise  to  the  dignity  of  this 
great  question,  the  safety  of  the  country  under  the  Constitution, 
I  address  you  to-night  in  behalf  of  that  union  of  good  men  which 
was  inaugurated  here  in  the  City  of  New  York,  and  whose  in 
fluence  will,  I  trust,  extend  wider  over  this  vast  state,  till  it  pro 
duces  a  conservative  majority  in  favor  of  the  Constitution  and 
the  Union.  (Cheers.)  In  speaking,  my  countrymen,  in  behalf 
of  this  great  issue,  I  shall  necessarily  have  to  deal  with  the  fate  of 
my  section.  I  shall  necessarily  have  to  deal  with  her  position  in 
this  Union,  past,  present,  and  prospective.  I  shall  necessarily 
have  to  deal  with  her  relations  to  the  Constitution  and  the  Union, 
and  her  relations  and  connections  with  you  in  this  section  of  the 
country. 

"It  is  another  mistake  that  is  made  by  some  men  —  good  men, 
doubtless,  indulge  in  it  but  it  is  no  less  a  mistake  —  that  the  South, 
on  the  great  issue  that  divides  the  North  and  the  South,  has  been 
on  the  aggressive.  Far,  very  far  from  it.  The  readings  of  history, 
the  teachings  of  your  own  age  and  your  own  experience,  all  dis 
prove  it.  The  South  asks  from  this  government  but  simple 
protection  from  wrong.  (Cheers.)  She  claims  and  she  must  have 
it,  and  she  will  have  it.  (Tumultuous  cheers.)  She  must  have 
1  Pennsylvania  goes  Republican  in  a  state  election. 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L.  YANCEY     303 

and  she  will  have  a  recognized  equality  in  the  Union,  or  she  will 
take  it  out  of  it.  (Cheers.)  We  desire,  my  countrymen,  the  Union 
of  the  Constitution.  We  know  no  other.  Convince  us,  as  very  pos 
sibly  it  might  be  done,  —  and  I  am  very  far  from  thinking  it  can 
not  be  done  —  that  we  can  be  a  more  prosperous  people  outside  of 
the  Union  and  the  Constitution,  and  the  Southern  mind  will  reject  it. 
The  South  is  loyal  to  the  compact  which  her  fathers  made  with  your 
fathers,  and  that  compact  she  means  to  defend  against  all  comers, 
whether  in  a  majority  or  in  a  minority.  She  claims  only  equality 
within  the  Union,  not  asking  of  this  government  one  single  act  that 
will  aggress  on  any  right  that  you  have.  Ready  at  all  times  now,  as 
she  has  been  in  the  past  —  and  it  is  a  part  of  her  glory  to  refer  to 
it  —  to  defend  your  rights  when  assailed,  whether  from  abroad 
or  from  within,  the  South  has  occupied  in  this  canvass  and  in 
times  past,  on  all  issues,  affecting  her  peculiar  institution,  slavery, 
a  defensive  position. 

"I  defy  the  astutest  declaimer  of  those  who  attack  her,  to  point 
to  one  historical  act  of  legislation  which  she  has  asked  that  is 
aggressive  on  the  rights  of  this  favored  section.  (Cheers.)  It  is 
quite  common  here  to  say  that  the  South  was  aggressive  in  repeal 
ing  the  Missouri  Compromise.  It  was  my  lot  to  be  in  the  public 
councils  when  that  compromise  was  proposed  three  different 
times  to  be  applied  to  the  territories  of  Oregon  and  New  Mexico, 
the  territories  acquired  from  Mexico.  Three  different  times  was 
that  compromise  proposed  by  Southern  men."  (Here  there  were 
demonstrations  of  hostility  to  the  speaker,  and  cries  of  "Put  him  out.") 

Yancey.  "No,  let  him  alone,  gentlemen,  I  want  him  to  hear 
some  truth.  (Cheers.)  Three  different  times  did  Southern  men 
propose  this  compromise  and  three  different  times,  while  I  was  in 
the  councils  of  the  country,  did  Northern  men  vote  it  down. 
Up  to  the  final  admission  of  Oregon,  in  1848,  was  that  com 
promise  proposed  again  and  again,  and  again  and  again  was  it 
rejected  by  the  House  by  the  Northern  men.  They  claimed  the 
Wilmot  Proviso  to  be  the  law  applicable  to  the  territory.  They 
claimed  that  they  should  have  all.  The  South,  while  recog 
nizing  the  injustice  done  her  under  the  Missouri  Compromise, 
was  willing  to  stand  by  and  adhere  to  the  idea  which  appeared 
to  be  the  settled  policy  of  the  country.  The  convention  which 


304  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

was  thought  to  be  a  convention  of  ultra  men,  the  Nashville 
convention,  proposed  again  the  Missouri  Compromise  as  the 
measure  by  which  the  South  would  stand.  But  finding  that 
this  compromise  repeatedly  proposed  by  her  was  rejected  by 
those  who  had  control  of  legislation  in  one  of  the  branches  of 
the  government,  the  South  threw  herself  on  her  constitutional 
position  in  the  government,  on  the  principle  in  the  Constitution 
which  made  them  equal  in  the  territories ;  she  demanded  an  equal 
showing  in  the  territories  and  she  never  demanded  more.  (Ap 
plause.)  It  does  not  lie  in  the  mouth  of  men  who  propose  to  take 
all  the  territories,  and  to  exclude  the  owners  of  four  millions  of 
slaves  from  settling  in  these  territories,  to  say  that  the  South  is 
aggressive,  when  they  take  from  the  South  the  privilege  of  forming 
more  slave  states  out  of  the  vast  and  magnificent  domain  of  our 
common  country.  (Cheers.) 

"Now,  friends,  we  do  not  stand  upon  compromise.  We  stand 
upon  something  far  higher  than  compromise,  something  more 
sacred  than  compromise.  (Applause.)  We  stand  upon  the  con 
stitutional  compact  made  by  our  fathers  with  your  fathers,  and  we 
take  that  compact  as  it  was  interpretated  by  them  and  by  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States ;  and  with  this  faith  the  South 
takes  her  position,  and  from  that  position  she  will  not  recede, 
nor  will  she  be  driven  so  long  as  there  is  a  Union  worthy  of  being 
preserved.  (Loud  applause.)  What  is  that  constitutional  posi 
tion  ?  It  is  this :  we  are  the  owners  of  four  million  slaves.  How 
did  we  get  them  ?  We  have  inherited  them  from  the  men  of  the 
Revolution,  who  fought  the  battles  and  wrote  the  Declaration  of 
Independence,  and  maintained  their  principles  by  the  spilling  of 
their  blood  and  the  sacrifice  of  life,  courage,  and  personal  welfare. 
We  have  received  this  system  of  labor  as  an  inheritance  from 
those  men  who,  after  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  wrote  the 
Constitution.  Now,  in  that  instrument  provision  was  made,  not 
only  for  the  increase,  but  for  the  safety  and  protection  of  the  slave 
as  property.  But  at  this  day  it  is  propounded  in  high  quarters, 
that  there  is  an  irrepressible  conflict  in  the  Constitution  between 
free  labor  and  the  slave  labor,  and  that  that  conflict  must  go  on 
till  Southern  institutions  and  Southern  citizens  are  all  destroyed. 
Gentlemen,  there  is  an  irrepressible  conflict  between  that  gentle- 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L.  YANCEY    305 

man  and  his  policy  and  the  writings  of  our  fathers  and  the  com 
pact  which  they  left  us.  (Applause.)  In  that  irrepressible  conflict 
all  these  good  men  who  love  the  Union  and  the  Constitution,  and 
love  justice,  truth,  and  their  neighbors  at  the  South,  must  stand 
by  the  Constitution  or  else  they  will  be  recreant  to  the  principles 
of  constitutional  loyalty.  (Applause.) 

"Now,  what  has  the  Constitution  done  for  us?  Our  fathers 
were  not  only  slave  owners,  but  they  bought  slaves  in  Africa  and 
brought  them  into  this  country.  When  the  framers  of  the  Con 
stitution  were  drawing  it  up,  Virginia  desired  to  get  rid  of  slaves 
but  Massachusetts  and  several  other  states  desired  that  it  should 
be  carried  on  (laughter  and  applause),  and  Massachusetts  and  the 
other  states  that  joined  with  her  succeeded  in  engrafting  into  the 
Constitution  the  provision  that  the  slave  statute  should  not  be 
abrogated  by  the  act  of  Congress,  nor  any  amendment  made  to 
the  Constitution,  before  the  year  1808.  (Applause.)  Under  the 
Constitution  all  other  clauses  but  those  relating  to  the  slaves 
could  be  amended,  if  the  people  desired  it ;  but  the  friends  of  the 
slave  traffic  were  so  strenuous  in -regard  to  it  that  there  is  a  distinct 
provision  of  the  Constitution  that  the  clause  relating  thereto  shall 
not  be  amended.  In  fact,  it  was  beyond  the  reach  of  constitutional 
amendment.  It  was  a  fundamental  provision  made  by  our  fathers, 
one  with  the  others,  that  it  should  not  be  altered  or  amended  till 
1808.  How  does  that  stand  with  the  doctrine  of  the  irrepressible 
conflict?  To  me  it  appears  that  there  is  so  little  agreement  be 
tween  the  two  things  that  the  Constitution  knocks  the  irrepressible 
conflict  on  the  head.  That  our  fathers  provided  for  the  increase 
of  the  institution  is  beyond  all  doubt.  They  were  not  satisfied 
with  the  four  hundred  thousand  slaves  that  existed  at  the  com 
mencement  of  the  Revolution,  but  demanded  that  the  number 
should  be  increased  by  importation  until  the  year  1808,  and  in 
that  year  no  less  than  one  hundred  thousand  slaves  were  imported 
into  the  country  under  the  authority  of  the  Constitution,  and  it  is 
the  descendants  of  these  slaves  who  are  now  scattered  throughout 
the  Southern  states.  And  these  are  the  slaves,  guaranteed  to 
us  by  the  Constitution,  whom  Mr.  Seward  and  Mr.  Lincoln  pro 
pose  to  take  away  from  us  by  infamous  legislation.  (Applause.) 
Now,  gentlemen,  what  our  fathers  deemed  a  thing  so  sacred  that 


306  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

they  demanded  a  constitutional  guarantee  for  its  increase,  con 
tinuance  and  protection  as  property,  should  certainly  be  no  less 
so  to  their  sons,  and  they,  therefore,  hold  that  they  shall  not  be 
robbed  of  their  slaves  under  any  form  of  law.  (Applause.) 

"Not  only  did  our  fathers  provide  for  the  increase  of  this  species 
of  property,  but  for  its  safety  against  attacks  that  are  made  against 
it  to  this  day.  It  has  often  been  said  that  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  is  inspired  with  something  almost  divine.  These 
great  men  who  framed  it  for  the  common  good  seem  to  have 
known  what  would  be  the  ultimate  fate  of  the  negroes  in  the 
North ;  they  seem  to  have  foreseen  that  they  would  die  out  in 
the  colder  states  of  the  North,  and  that,  as  a  consequence,  they 
would  seek  to  locate  themselves  in  the  more  genial  regions  of  the 
South.  Such  has  been  the  fact.  And  our  fathers  were  not  ig 
norant  either  that  there  would  always  be  men  along  the  borders 
and  near  the  slave  states  seeking  to  mislead  the  slaves ;  and  there 
fore  they  took  the  precaution  of  inserting  into  the  Constitution 
the  provision  that  all  fugitive  slaves  should  be  given  up,  and  made 
it  incumbent  on  the  states  that  they  should  aid  in  the  execution 
of  the  laws,  and  that  they  should  cause  all  escaping  slaves  to  be 
surrendered.  Therefore,  while  there  were  provisions  for  the  in 
crease  and  the  spread  of  the  institution,  its  protection  was  also 
amply  provided  for.  Now,  the  law  is  given  to  government  for 
carrying  out  its  great  mission,  the  protection  of  life,  liberty,  and 
property.  Our  fathers  increased  the  power  of  protection  and  this 
was  done  by  the  Constitution. 

"It  was  further  given  to  the  slaveholding  states  to  have  repre 
sentation  for  three-fifths  of  their  slave  property.  Although  the 
slaves  are  not  citizens  under  the  form  of  our  government,  yet  our 
fathers  had  a  three-fifths  representation  by  virtue  of  their  possess 
ing  these  slaves.  But  then  they  were  organized  property  for 
taxation,  and  under  the  Constitution  direct  taxation  is  to  be  im 
posed  in  proportion  of  three-fifths  of  the  slave  population.  Here, 
then,  is  the  constitutional  increase  of  the  institution  of  slavery; 
also  the  safety  guaranteed  to  it  under  the  provisions  of  the  Fugi 
tive  Slave  Act.  It  is  an  acknowledgment  of  property  to  be  taxed 
as  such  when  the  nation  chooses  to  derive  a  revenue  from  it. 

"Under  this  compact  the  South  has  existed  and  prospered,  and 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L.  YANCEY     307 

you  in  the  North,  in  conjunction  with  the  South,  have  derived 
much  benefit  from  slavery.  It  has  been  said  that  the  South  is 
not  prosperous  owing  to  this  institution,  and  they  undertake  to 
compare  the  North  and  the  South  in  a  very  invidious  manner. 
I  do  not  desire  to  make  any  such  invidious  comparisons.  I  re 
joice  in  the  prosperity  of  this  nation.  I  rejoice  that  the  North  is 
a  great,  a  prosperous,  an  intelligent,  and  a  happy  people ;  also 
that  my  section  is  not  behindhand  in  any  of  those  qualities  in  a 
nation  which  make  up  a  true  and  great  manhood.  (Applause.) 
When  the  Revolution  commenced,  the  South  possessed  a  popula 
tion  of  812,000  whites  and  450,000  slaves.  The  North,  on  the 
other  hand,  had  1,900,000  whites  and  47,000  slaves,  making  in 
the  aggregate  about  a  half  million  slaves  in  the  two  sections. 
How  is  it  now?  According  to  the  best  statistical  statement, 
taken  from  official  sources,  there  are  now  in  the  Northern  states 
18,000,000  whites,  and  in  the  South  8,000,000  whites  and  4,000,000 
slaves.  Now,  this  will  show  that  population  in  the  North  and  in 
the  South  has  kept  pace  very  well  together.  In  fact,  the  North 
has  not  kept  quite  up  to  the  Southern  ratio  in  increase  of  popula 
tion  ;  and  this,  notwithstanding  the  great  advantages  in  this 
respect  which  you  have  had  from  4,000,000  foreigners,  a  benefit 
which  does  not  extend  to  the  South.  The  natural  increase  of  the 
South  surpasses  the  natural  increase  of  the  North,  and  it  is  re 
markable  that  the  natural  increase  of  the  slaves  is  equal  to  their 
masters,  considering  that  they  are  in  a  sickly  country  exposed  to 
noonday  heat  of  a  Southern  sun,  and  the  masters  are  protected 
by  exemption  from  real  manual  labor.  Yet  the  black  population, 
notwithstanding  all  the  difficulties  under  which  they  labor,  and 
which  are  incident  to  their  condition,  have  kept  pace  with  those 
who  are  in  happier  circumstances  of  life.  It  proves  that  our  in 
stitution  is  well  calculated  to  improve  their  condition.  They 
are  not  treated  with  cruelty  or  tyranny  as  a  general  thing,  although 
in  all  communities  there  will  be  found  hard  men.  I  have  no  doubt 
it  is  so  in  New  York,  but  not  greater  than  it  is  in  the  South,  though 
to  an  equal  extent.  Now,  these  facts  about  the  census  cannot  be 
denied.  Figures,  they  say,  when  properly  arranged  and  calcu 
lated,  cannot  lie,  although  I  believe  they  can  very  often  be  located 
in  such  a  manner  as  to  tell  very  big  lies.  (Laughter.) 


308  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

"Look,  now,  at  our  industry,  and  it  will  favorably  compare 
with  yours,  although  you  in  the  North  are  peculiarly  an  industrious 
people.  But  the  men  of  the  South,  like  those  of  the  North,  have 
not  been  wasting  the  time  that  God  has  given  them.  Look  at 
the  exports  of  1848  and  1849.  There  has  been  a  large  amount  of 
surplus  production  in  the  two  sections,  which  we  do  not  require 
for  our  own  uses,  but  export  to  foreign  countries,  and  it  is  well 
known  that  a  nation  is  generally  judged  by  the  quantity  of  sur 
plus  products  which  it  exports  to  other  parts  of  the  world.  There 
was  exported  last  year  for  the  whole  country  products  to  the 
value  of  $353,894,000 ;  $57,000,000  of  which  was  in  specie,  leaving 
as  the  result  of  produce  and  actual  labor,  $278,292,000  for  the  year 
ending  June,  1859.1  Now,  of  this  vast  quantity  of  property,  it 
will  not  be  uninteresting  to  inquire  how  much  has  come  from  the 
greatly  despised  Southern  section,  where  it  is  said  that  labor 
meets  with  no  reward  and  that  everything  is  demoralized  with 
the  white  and  black  men.  What  is  it?  Let  the  agitators  and 
political  speculators  look  at  the  actual  figures.  The  North 
exported  $5,281,000  exclusively,  with  produce  amounting  to 
$650,000,000,  and  $150,000  in  ice.  There  was  exported  in  that 
year,  $84,417,000  of  mixed  productions  common  to  both  sections 
of  the  country,  as  to  North  Carolina,  Tennessee,  Mississippi,  and 
Illinois,  Ohio,  and  other  states.  Now,  it  is  deemed  a  fair  calcu 
lation  that  the  North  has  one-third  of  that.  The  whole  product 
then  is  $188,692,000 ;  of  this  the  following  is  the  proportion  of 
the  articles  exported  :  cotton,  $161,434,000;  tobacco,  $21,074,000; 
rosin  and  turpentine,  $3,554,000 ;  rice,  $2,207,000  ;  tar  and  pitch, 
$141,000;  brown  sugar,  $96,000 ;  molasses,  $5000 ;  hemp,  $9000, 
(A  voice,  "Hemp  is  still  growing,  I  hope.")  A  gentleman  says  he 
hopes  hemp  is  still  growing.  I  am  glad  that  hemp  yet  grows, 
and  I  am  only  sorry  that  there  is  not  more  of  it.  (Laughter  and 
applause.)  What  is  the  result  of  these  figures  ?  They  show  that 
the  South  in  the  fiscal  year  alluded  to  exported  $217,000,000,  and 
the  North  exported  only  about  seventy,  no,  not  seventy,  but  about 
sixty-one  millions  of  dollars,  exclusive  of  the  amount  of  specie 

1  The  figures  given  in  this  paragraph  either  were  intentionally  garbled 
by  Yancey,  or  the  reporter  in  taking  down  the  speech  made  mistakes ; 
as  given,  the  figures  are  meaningless. 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L.  YANCEY     309 

shipped  from  California,  which  adds  about  one  hundred  and  ten 
or  one  hundred  and  twelve  million,  and  the  exports  of  the  South, 
therefore,  are  nearly  double.  Now  the  agitators,  speculators,  and 
others  would  do  well  to  think  of  this,  and  it  would  be  right  for  these 
philosophers  to  study  the  figures  before  they  undertake  to  abuse 
my  section  of  the  Union. 

"In  the  present  year  the  results  are  much  larger  in  the  favor  of 
the  South,  as  $195,000,000  is  the  increase  of  the  cotton  crop. 
It  will  be  found  that  this  is  not  an  isolated  case.  The  cotton 
crop  is  more  extensive  generally  than  in  previous  years.  But 
no  matter  how  far  this  may  go,  the  results  will  show  that  there 
have  been  large  increases  in  the  production  of  tobacco,  rice, 
etc.  On  the  whole,  the  South  produces  more  than  the  North, 
including  the  specie  from  California.  This  shows  that  this  in 
stitution  is  valuable,  not  only  to  the  South,  but  to  the  North. 
The  prosperity  we  have  derived  is  great,  and  you  have  legitimate 
share  in  it." 

Mr.  Yancey  then  proceeded  to  speak  at  length  concerning  the 
differences  between  the  climate  of  the  North  and  of  the  South 
and  of  the  capacity  for  active  labor  possessed  by  the  Northern 
men,  and  the  beneficial  results  following  from  those  fraternal 
relations.  "  This  labor  is  the  means  of  producing  much  wealth 
from  the  South,  and  while  the  white  people  of  the  North  can 
undergo  continuous  labor,  those  of  the  South,  exposed  as  they  are 
to  the  heat  of  the  climate,  cannot  do  so.  No  white  man  can  work 
at  laborious  occupation  under  the  fervid  heat  of  the  South.  The 
consequence  is  that  every  one  works  in  the  North.  The  merchants 
here  in  the  counting  house  works  as  well  and  as  hard  as  his  clerk 
to  whom  he  pays  $1000  or  $1500  annually,  and  with  a  far  greater 
sense  of  responsibility. 

"The  commerce  of  the  North  and  of  the  South  in  its  rapid  de 
velopment  has  also  been  the  means  of  producing  wealth  to  both 
sections,  in  the  friendly  competition  with  other  countries  in  carry 
ing  merchandise  abroad.  New  York  is  the  great  heart  of  the 
whole  commerce  of  the  country.  Commerce  has  its  seat  here, 
large-headed  and  large-hearted  commerce,  and  here  it  takes  these 
products  and  disperses  them,  two-thirds  through  this  part  of  the 
country  and  then  over  the  world.  (Applause.)  The  prosperity 


310  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

of  the  whole  country  depends  on  the  advancement  of  New  York. 
(Applause.)  Now,  then,  look  at  your  coasting  trade.  Look  at  it 
and  you  will  find  that  it  is  a  most  gratifying  spectacle.  Then 
see  what  are  the  demands  of  the  South.  The  South  asks  nothing 
from  there  but  that  you  will  not  allow  any  one  to  steal  away  her 
niggers.  (Laughter  and  applause.)  Enlarge  your  jails  and  peni 
tentiaries,  reenforce  and  strengthen  your  police  force,  and  keep 
the  irrepressible  conflict  fellows  from  stealing  our  niggers,  and  we 
are  satisfied.  (Applause.)  Now,  is  there  anything  unreasonable 
in  that  ?  ( "  No !  no  !  " )  It  is  the  voice  of  reason ;  it  is  the  voice 
of  loyalty;  it  is  the  voice  of  common  sense,  which  those  specu 
lating  theorists  do  not  have.  (Applause.)  Now  I  say  that  we 
ask  nothing  else. 

"  When  has  the  South  come  and  asked  you  to  protect  her  cotton  ? 
Gentlemen,  we  defy  the  world.  England,  with  her  acknowledged 
power  in  the  world,  is  seeking  a  spot  in  which  to  make  cotton,  an 
aggression  probably  for  the  very  reason  of  conquering  nation  after 
nation,  whose  fertile  soil  and  climate  are  fitted  for  trying  the  ex 
periment.  England,  after  all  her  efforts  has  raised  cotton  at  the 
cost  of  fifty  cents  per  pound,  which  she  has  sold  in  the  market 
in  competition  with  American  cotton  at  ten  to  fifteen  cents  per 
pound.  We  ask  no  premium  against  competition  with  the  culti 
vation  of  rice  and  tobacco.  The  peculiar  products  of  Southern 
labor  defy  the  competition  of  the  civilized  world.  The  South  in 
that  respect  is  independent  of  the  world.  (Applause.) 

"Now,  how  is  it  with  you?  I  know  you  will  bear  with  me 
when  in  a  friendly  way  I  undertake  to  trace  the  history  of  legisla 
tion  as  regards  Northern  labor.  How  often  has  New  England 
beseeched  Congress  for  protection  to  her  cotton  and  woolen  manu 
factures?  How  often  has  protection  been  asked  for  your  iron 
manufactures  ?  And  you,  gentlemen,  here  in  New  York,  Boston, 
and  Philadelphia,  have  got  protection  to  your  shipping  interests. 
Just  think  of  it  a  moment.  Nobody  can  compete  with  you  for 
our  carrying  trade.  Let  the  English  or  French  ships  anchor  by 
the  side  of  a  Yankee  skipper  in  the  harbor  of  Mobile  Bay.  I  take 
to  them  my  one  hundred  and  fifty  bales  of  cotton  and  I  say  to  the 
English  captain,  'What  will  you  take  this  to  New  York  for?' 
'For  a  dollar  a  bale/  says  he.  Can  I  send  it  by  him?  The 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L.  YANCEY    311 

Yankee  alongside  says,  'I  will  take  it  for  two  dollars  a  bale/ 
What  am  I  bound  to  do  ?  To  give  it  to  the  Yankee  skipper  be 
cause  our  coasting  laws  protect  the  shipping  of  the  Northern 
states  to  the  exclusion  of  all  others.  Consequently  your  shipping 
is  encouraged.  The  carrying  trade  is  almost  exclusively  con 
fined  to  the  products  of  the  South.  England,  France,  and  Hol 
land  cannot  compete  with  you,  owing  to  our  laws.  Now  we  have 
no  such  law  protecting  our  industry.  We  cannot  deal  in  shipping  ; 
you  do.  And  yet  we  do  not  complain. 

"Now,  how  is  it  with  you ?  There  is  a  tariff  of  from  twenty  to 
thirty  per  cent  on  your  iron  manufactures.  To  be  sure  we  derive 
a  revenue  from  this,  but  you  derive  also  a  premium  to  your  labor, 
and  consequently  the  labor  of  the  North,  that  I  have  been  com 
paring  to  the  labor  of  the  South,  has  the  benefit  of  a  premium 
given  to  it  by  this  tariff.  The  South  has  no  such  benefit ;  she  asks 
none.  She  can  afford  to  let  you  have  all  that.  (Applause.)  I 
know  that  some  of  our  Southern  friends  complain  of  this,  and  say 
that  it  is  not  exactly  right.  South  Carolina,  you  know,  once 
brought  us  very  near  the  verge  of  dissolution  in  consequence  of 
what  she  believed  a  discrimination  between  the  industries  of  the 
country.  But  this  has  passed  away ;  there  is  comparative  mutual 
understanding  now.  We  have  come  somewhere  near  a  substantial 
agreement  about  these  matters.  Less  protection  is  demanded 
now  than  formerly.  You  can  compete  much  easier  with  foreign 
industry  than  formerly,  and  by  and  by,  perhaps,  you  will  be  able 
to  throw  it  off  in  the  coastwise  trade.  But  the  fact  remains  that 
your  Northern  labor  demands  and  receives  from  the  government 
a  premium,  and  that  Southern  labor  receives  none ;  and  yet  it 
outstrips  the  labor  of  the  North  in  a  fair  contest.  (Applause.) 
Now  this  protection  is  very  valuable  to  you,  and  it  is  also  valu 
able  to  us.  It  is  valuable  to  the  whole  country  ;  and  I  do  not  men 
tion  these  facts  for  the  purpose  of  producing  any  fear.  I  trust 
that  you  are  not  on  that  level  in  which  your  loyalty  can  only  be 
measured  by  the  amount  of  money  you  make  out  of  this  govern 
ment.  (Laughter  and  applause.) 

"Now,  if  this  is  the  result,  then  comes  up  another  question. 
This  mutual  interchange  of  commodities  throughout  our  vast 
country,  the  gold  of  California,  the  gram  of  the  West,  the  manu- 


312  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

factures,  the  commerce ;  what  more  ?  What  a  sound,  magnificent 
basis  is  presented  in  these  states  for  a  prosperous  Union  under 
our  glorious  Constitution.  (Applause.)  We  aid  each  other  with 
a  proper  sense  of  brotherhood,  a  proper  sense  that  we  are  citizens 
of  the  same  country,  that  we  have  a  like  common  protection,  and 
should  deal  out  justice  to  each  section  with  an  equal  hand,  not 
raising  up  this  section  at  the  expense  of  any  other,  knowing  no 
section,  but  dealing  with  them  all  in  the  same  spirit  of  justice. 
That  spirit  should  exist  throughout  the  land.  But  this  cry  of 
the  assailant  that  now  resounds  throughout  your  borders,  from 
the  rock-bound  coast  of  Maine  to  the  golden  sands  of  Oregon, 
this  cry  of  the  assailant,  which,  it  is  said,  is  made  by  a  majority 
of  your  people,  that  this  great  institution,  in  itself  worth  $2,800,- 
000,000  —  worth  incalculably  more  than  that  when  all  its  social 
relations  which  are  interwoven  with  it  and  which  must  go  down 
if  that  institution  is  destroyed  —  this  cry  of  the  assailant  of  this 
great  and  valuable  institution,  now  presents  an  issue.  I  ask  you, 
gentlemen  of  New  York  and  of  this  Northern  section ;  I  ask  you, 
an  integral  part  of  the  eighteen  millions  that  have  been  held  up 
in  terrorem  by  one  unwise  braggart  son  of  your  section  as  able 
to  conquer  eight  million  (sensation) ;  I  ask  you,  my  countrymen, 
what  benefit  will  it  be  to  you  to  have  all  this  vast  industrial  and 
social  relation  of  the  South  destroyed  ?  (Applause.)  But  it 
is  not  to  be  destroyed. 

It  is  said  that  cotton,  which  is  so  valuable,  which  builds  up  the 
South  and  the  North,  which  keeps  the  world  going,  out  of  which 
nations  make  their  profit,  derive  their  comfort,  that  this  incom 
parable  article  can  be  raised  by  white  labor.  How  utterly  absurd 
to  any  one  who  knows  anything  of  our  climate,  of  our  system  of 
labor,  and  of  the  necessities  of  the  cotton  crop.  We  have  a  tem 
perature  in  the  summer  ranging  in  the  open  air  from  one  hundred 
and  ten  to  one  hundred  and  thirty  degrees  Fahrenheit.  No  white 
man  can  stand  labor  under  that  burning  sun,  and  they  do  not. 
The  owners  of  the  slaves  seek  your  genial  climate.  They  fill  all 
your  watering  places,  they  fill  the  hotels  of  this  vast  metropolis  ; 
they  travel  all  over  your  rivers  and  lakes,  and  stop  at  your  places 
of  resort,  seeking  not  for  recreation,  but  to  get  rid  of  the  miasma, 
the  fever,  the  hazards  of  life  that  are  incurred  in  the  hot  summer 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L.  YANCEY      313 

climate  in  the  summer  months.  And  how  do  the  overseers  avoid 
these  things  ?  They  protect  themselves  with  all  the  care  that  a 
man  can  who  does  not  labor.  They  often  go  to  the  fields  with 
umbrellas  over  their  heads,  or  seek  the  shade  of  a  friendly  tree, 
while  they  see  the  slaves  working  in  the  broiling  sun  without  a 
hat  or  anything  to  protect  their  heads.  Why,  the  negro  can  al 
most,  like  the  eagle,  look  the  sun  in  the  eye.  (Laughter  and 
applause.) 

"  These  glorious  sons  of  toil,  who  are  satisfied  with  their  con 
dition,  love  their  masters,  contribute  to  the  wealth  of  the  world, 
and  are  the  best  population  under  the  sun,  if  these  philosophers 
will  only  let  them  alone.  (Great  laughter  and  applause.)  Billious 
fevers  and  congestive  chills  are  things  peculiar  to  a  climate  where 
heat  and  moisture  prevail ;  and  great  heat  and  moisture  are  neces 
sary  to  the  cultivation  of  the  cotton  crop.  But  the  diseases  which 
heat  and  moisture  generate  do  not  affect  the  black  man.  He 
moves  among  them  perfectly  unharmed.  He  is  fitted  for  such  a 
climate.  Hard  labor  and  the  privations  incident  thereto  do  not 
destroy  the  negro.  Of  course,  they  are  under  the  commands  of 
a  master,  who  gives  them  their  food  and  their  clothing,  and  from 
the  natural  selfishness  which  is  common  to  all  men,  they  are  occa 
sionally  kept  at  work  longer  than  they  ought  to  be.  We  do  not 
pretend  to  deny  these  things.  But  the  census  shows  that  these 
people  increase  as  fast  as  the  whites.  Take  the  rate  of  their  in 
crease  since  the  Revolutionary  War  and  compare  it  with  that  of 
the  whites,  and  see  if  this  is  not  so.  This  shows  that  the  climate 
is  fitted  to  them  and  they  to  the  climate. 

"Not  so  with  the  white  race.  I  have  lived  at  the  South.  Sev 
eral  years  ago  I  passed  over  a  road  leading  to  Tuscaloosa,  in  Ala 
bama,  called  the  Old  Line  Creek  Road.  It  is  a  level  cotton  region. 
When  I  went  to  Alabama  in  1836,  what  do  you  think  that  was 
called  ?  It  was  called  the  Widows'  Road.  There  was  not  a  male 
head  of  a  family  living  there.  The  women  lived  because  they 
were  not  exposed  to  the  noonday's  sun  nor  to  the  night  air.  Being 
engaged  in  household  duties  they  escaped  the  mortality  that  car 
ried  off  nearly  every  man  living  on  that  road.  I  mention  this  to 
show  you  the  nature  of  the  Southern  climate.  No  man  exposes 
himself  to  the  heat  of  the  sun  without  great  danger,  and  we  have 


314  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

to  take  great  care  of  ourselves.  The  white  man  cannot  stand  the 
climate ;  the  negro  can. 

"But  even  admitting  that  the  white  man  can  stand  it,  he  cannot 
make  the  cotton  crop.  It  is  planted  about  the  first  of  April  — 
the  last  week  in  March  and  the  first  week  or  ten  days  in  April  — 
and  from  that  time  until  the  crop  is  gathered,  which  is  not  before 
the  first  of  January  if  there  is  a  fair  crop,  there  is  not  one  week  of 
intermission,  not  one  week  that  the  laborer  can  be  spared  without 
danger  an'd  loss.  Continuous  labor  is  absolutely  necessary  for 
the  safety  and  preservation  of  that  plant  all  through  the  heat  of 
the  summer.  The  cultivation  of  cotton  is  remarkable.  I  have 
seen  a  field  of  five  or  six  hundred  acres  in  some  of  our  fine  cotton- 
growing  counties  in  which  there  was  not  a  spear  of  grass  to  be  seen. 
The  cultivation  requires  more  care  and  attention  than  any  of 
your  garden  products,  and  demands  regular,  continuous,  persistent 
labor.  Now,  don't  you  know  that  white  labor  is  not  continuous 
and  persistent  during  the  whole  season  ?  Look  at  your  strike. 
What  do  you  think  the  effect  of  one  like  that  that  took  place  in  the 
town  of  Lynn  amongst  the  shoemakers,  would  be  among  the  cotton 
crops  of  the  South?  Why,  a  hundred  millions  would  be  lost  to 
the  world ;  possibly  a  revolution  in  England,  and  in  all  the  civi 
lized  world,  owing  to  the  want  of  this  cotton.  (Applause.)  There 
fore,  I  say  in  view  of  the  independence  of  white  labor,  striking  off 
when  it  pleases  for  better  wages,  seeking  for  more  genial  employ 
ment,  going  off,  it  may  be,  to  some  more  inviting  region,  that  with 
the  white  labor  the  cotton  crop  of  the  South  could  not  be  raised ; 
such  labor  could  not  be  depended  upon.  Instead  of  having  four 
and  one-half  million  cotton  bales  as  now,  if  we  depended  upon 
white"  labor,  in  my  opinion  the  product  would  not  amount  to  two 
million  bales.  How  could  the  civilized  world  spare  two  and  one- 
half  million  bales,  merely  to  gratify  these  speculating  philosophers  ? 
(Laughter.) 

"So,  then,  gentlemen,  this  institution  is  necessary  to  the  civiliza 
tion  of  the  world,  is  necessary  to  your  prosperity  as  well  as  to  ours. 
It  is  an  institution,  too,  that  doesn't  harm  you,  for  we  don't  let 
our  niggers  run  about  to  injure  anybody  (laughter) ;  we  keep  them  ; 
they  never  steal  from  you ;  they  don't  trouble  you  even  with  that 
peculiar  stench,  which  is  very  good  in  the  nose  of  the  Southern 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L.  YANCEY     315 

man,  but  intolerable  in  the  nose  of  a  Northerner.  (Laughter.) 
None  of  these  things  trouble  you.  The  police  force  that  we  re 
quire  troubles  only  ourselves;  the  expense  of  maintaining  it  is 
ours,  and  by  the  bye,  that  reminds  me  of  an  interesting  item  that 
you  ought  to  consider.  The  masters  have  to  take  care  of  the  slaves. 
Now,  what  do  you  suppose  is  the  cost  of  the  clothing  of  these  four 
million  of  negroes,  which  the  North  furnishes  ?  The  cost  is  some 
twenty  million  of  dollars.  Twenty  million  dollars  worth  of  cotton 
and  woolen  goods  are  bought  at  the  North ;  but  five  millions  in 
the  shape  of  axes,  hoes,  chains,  iron  castings,  etc.,  are  paid  to  the 
North  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  on  your  industry.  The  South 
does  not  choose  to  devote  her  labor  to  these  things.  She  is  willing 
to  raise  what  she  can  and  sell  it  at  a  fair  price,  and  then  to  go  to 
you  and  buy  that  which  you  can  raise  cheaper  than  herself.  They 
spend  in  the  Northern  states  on  an  average  $10  per  annum  for  each 
slave,  which  would  be  $40,000,000. 

"And  these  $40,000,000  Mr.  Seward  sneers  at  and  thinks  it 
folly  to  regard  the  trade  as  an  important  one.  He  would  not 
legislate  of  course  in  relation  to  it,  and  Lincoln  I  presume  would 
never  think  of  making  it  a  material  subject  of  consideration  in  the 
way  of  legislation.  They  want  to  carry  out  their  peculiar  theo 
retical  views  in  relation  to  religion  and  morals.  (Laughter.)  Well, 
I  hope,  gentlemen,  as  you  are  said  to  be  a  very  conscientious 
people,  descended  from  the  Puritans  and  also  the  Dutch  (laughter) , 
who  are  a  conscientious  people,  I  hope  that  you  will  intrust  the 
legislation  on  morals  and  religion  to  the  Great  Ruler  of  the  Universe 
and  won't  let  Lincoln  and  Seward  have  anything  to  do  with  it. 
(Great  laughter.)  Now  these  gentlemen,  who  are  disposed  to  legis 
late  for  material  interests,  are  not  going  of  course  to  consider  this 
institution  one  of  that  class,  no  matter  how  much  you  suffer. 
They  scoff  at  the  merchants  who  talk  about  fusion  for  the  purpose 
of  saving  the  country  and  its  industry.  I  may  be  mistaken,  but 
I  am  ready  to  sit  at  the  feet  of  philosophers  who  will  teach  me 
better ;  but  my  idea  is  that  the  government  was  instituted  to  pro 
tect  material  interests  alone;  that  it  is  not  a  school  for  ethical 
theories ;  that  we  are  all  to  worship  as  we  think  proper ;  and  that 
our  morals  are  in  no  ways  meddled  with  except  that  we  shall  be 
required  to  act  with  decency  and  order.  All  these  things  are  left 


316  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

to  the  individual  consciences  and  to  the  consciences  of  public 
opinion  governing  the  states.  Government  deals  alone  with  the 
material  interests  of  life,  and  is  designed  for  the  protection  of  the 
liberty  of  our  own  citizens  and  of  their  property.  It  sets  up  no 
school  of  morals  or  religion,  touching  the  right  of  one  man  to  hold 
in  bondage  another  man  which  our  fathers  settled. 

"Our  fathers  settled  the  right  to  hold  the  negro  in  bondage  for 
his  labor ;  not,  of  course,  to  hold  property  in  man.  I  do  not  hold 
property  in  any  black  man  as  a  man ;  as  a  man  he  belongs  to  my 
state  and  is  protected  by  it.  My  state  says :  '  You  shall  not  give 
him  an  unusual  or  cruel  whipping ;  if  you  do,  I  will  fine  you  and 
imprison  you,  one  or  both,  at  the  discretion  of  the  judge  or  the  jury. 
As  a  man  you  shall  feed  him  and  shall  not  starve  him ;  if  you  do 
not  give  him  a  fair  allowance,  you  will  be  indicted.  It  is  a  mis 
demeanor  and  you  shall  be  punished  for  it.'  As  a  man  I  may  work 
him  and  exact  a  proper  degree  of  labor,  and  no  further.  I  cannot 
take  his  life  or  injure  his  limbs ;  if  I  do,  I  am  liable  to  the  same 
penalties  as  if  it  were  a  white  man." 

A  voice.    " Suppose,  as  a  man,  he  runs  away."     (Laughter.) 

Yancey.  "Then  I  recover  him,  because  the  Constitution  says 
that  he  shall  be  delivered  up.  (Great  cheering.)  Gentlemen, 
the  negro  has  got  legs,  you  may  be  certain,  and  when  any  of  these 
speculating  philosophers  go  down  South,  they  make  him  think 
that  he  is  one  of  the  worst-used  people  in  the  world,  and  he  runs 
away,  and  after  being  half-starved  in  the  brambles  and  briars,  he 
comes  home  hungry  and  ragged,  and  is  glad  to  go  to  work  again. 
(Laughter.)  Running  away  negroes  is  a  common  thing.  Now  we 
have  horses  that  run  away.  (Laughter.)  Does  that  deprive  them 
of  being  property  ?  If  any  man  takes  a  runaway  horse  and  appro 
priates  him,  the  law  calls  it  theft.  So  with  a  negro.  Now,  I  wish 
you  to  enforce  that  law  when  my  negroes  run  away.  (Applause.) 

"Now  I  say  that  this  institution  is  assailed,  and  I  will  give  you 
a  Southern  man's  view  which  we  as  defendants  occupy,  and  the 
position  in  which  our  assailants  stand,  as  we  conceive.  They  say 
that  there  shall  be  no  more  slave  trade ;  that  that  is  in  accordance 
with  the  spirit  of  the  Constitution  and  the  teaching  of  the  fathers. 
All  the  vast  territory,  that  belongs  to  the  government  and  which 
the  Supreme  Court  has  said  the  government  holds  in  trust  for  the 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L.   YANCEY     317 

people  of  the  various  states,  for  Alabama  as  well  as  for  New  York, 
shall  be  kept  free  of  slavery.  There  is  an  area  of  territory  belong 
ing  to  the  United  States  large  enough  to  form  twenty  states  equal 
to  New  Jersey  or  Maryland,  and  even,  I  believe,  South  Carolina. 
In  all  this  territory  the  South  is  to  have  no  share  whatever  in 
settling  with  its  property.  The  South  wants  the  advantage  of 
a  community  of  young  and  sister  states  around  her  to  sustain  her 
against  the  conflict  of  sectional  passion ;  she  wants  the  advantage 
of  a  spread  of  her  institution  which  the  figures  show  you  is  as  much 
for  your  prosperity  as  for  hers.  In  other  words,  if  there  are  to  be 
no  more  new  slave  states,  the  general  prosperity  is  to  be  curtailed 
in  precisely  that  proportion.  (Applause.)  I  will  consider  here 
after  what  is  the  teaching  of  the  fathers  on  this  question.  I  am 
now  making  a  statement  of  what  I  consider  to  be  the  point  of  as 
sault  which  the  South  is  undergoing.  Again,  they  say  that  the 
slave  trade  between  the  states  is  to  be  abolished ;  that  they  have 
a  right  to  do  so  under  the  Constitution.  Now,  that  slave  trade 
between  the  states  is  incident  to  its  life  and  prosperity.  Confine 
a  man  to  one  spot  and  say  that  you  must  make  a  show  right 
there  and  nowhere  else,  and  would  that  man  prosper  and  thrive 
and  be  a  benefit  to  the  community  and  to  himself?  You  know 
it  is  not  so.  Trade  must  be  allowed  to  seek  its  own  mart  and 
level.  Otherwise  you  are  interfering  unconstitutionally  and  im 
properly  and  pursuing  a  bad  policy  as  to  trade.  It  needs  to  be 
entirely  unshackled.  The  great  idea  of  the  world  at  this  time  is 
for  free  trade.  Now,  take  away  the  right  to  sell  our  slaves  and 
you  destroy  the  value  of  our  property  to  that  extent.  It  is  so 
in  regard  to  any  property.  Again,  they  endeavor  to  nullify  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Law,  and  twelve  states  have  passed  laws  to  that 
end.  They  mean  to  abolish  slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia, 
and  in  the  arsenals  and  dockyards." 

A  voice.    "Who  says  so?" 

Yancey.  "The  abolitionists  and  Black  Republicans  say  so. 
(Loud  applause.)  I  know  no  distinction.  Seward  says  so.  Lin 
coln  says  so.  Lincoln  first  enunciated  the  irrepressible  conflict. 
(Applause.)  Put  him  in  power  and  he  will  build  up  an  abolition 
ist  party  in  every  Southern  state ;  there  is  no  doubt  about  it. 
There  are  men  there  who  will  take  office  and  will  come  to  sym- 


318  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMRAIGN 

pathize  with  his  views  in  time,  and  so  we  shall  have  a  demoralized 
public  opinion  among  our  own  people.  Marshals,  postmasters, 
and  other  federal  officers  will  sympathize  with  Lincoln  and  this 
irrepressible  conflict  notion. 

"With  the  election  of  a  Black  Republican  all  the  South  will 
be  menaced.  Emissaries  will  percolate  between  master  and  slave 
as  water  between  the  crevices  of  the  rocks  underground.  They 
will  be  found  everywhere,  with  strychnine  to  put  in  our  wells,  as 
is  the  case  now  in  Texas.  (Laughter,  hisses,  and  long  applause.) 
Gentlemen,  there  are  various  modes  in  which  ideas  are  expressed. 
Men  have  tongues  and  they  speak  reason ;  adders  have  tongues 
and  they  hiss.  (Laughter  and  cries  of  "Put  the  strychnine  fellow 
out.")  As  I  was  saying,  that  in  Texas  it  was  proved  beyond  all 
doubt  that  men  were  taken  there  prowling  about,  some  of  whom 
were  called  levellers,  upon  whom  were  found  all  the  means  and 
appliances  of  exciting  the  slaves  there  to  insurrection.  Pistols 
and  bowie  knives  and  boxes  of  ammunition  were  found  in  buggies, 
and  various  things  in  different  places,  and  such  quantities  of 
strychnine  were  found  also  as  to  excite  wonder  as  to  where  in  the 
world  it  all  came  from,  and  where  on  earth  it  could  have  been 
manufactured.  But  there  those  things  were  found,  and  for  what 
purpose  do  you  think?  Of  carrying  on  the  irrepressible  conflict 
in  the  underground  way  they  have  of  doing  these  things;  and 
carrying  on  the  irrepressible  conflict  not  in  the  open  face  of  day, 
not  meeting  the  Southern  men  face  to  face,  but  carrying  it  on  in 
the  darkness  of  the  night,  with  the  torch  lighted  to  burn  and  de 
stroy,  with  the  springs  and  wells  poisoned,  and  the  slaves  secretly 
incited  to  insurrection.  At  this  moment  we  have  the  slave  in 
insurrection  in  Alabama  and  Virginia,  and  in  various  other  states. 
In  many  places  the  thing  is  showing  itself,  and  it  will  spread,  too, 
under  the  action  of  these  marauding  bands  who  are  scattered  over 
the  country,  and  who  are  so  fanatical  as  to  think  that  they  are  doing 
a  good  and  just  thing  in  carrying  on  the  irrepressible  conflict  be 
tween  the  sentiment  of  freedom  and  the  sentiment  of  slavery. 
So  that  you  see  that  the  South  is  in  a  dangerous  position,  and  that 
the  torch  when  applied  will  come  in  contact  with  a  very  inflam 
mable  article,  and  it  will  be  a  wonder  if  the  institution  be  not  blown 
up  by  the  torch  of  the  incendiary. 


DEMOCRATIC   SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L.   YANCEY     319 

"Thus  we  are  attacked  in  every  relation  of  life  by  men  of  power 
and  sense  enough  to  do  incalculable  injury  to  us.  Our  property 
destroyed;  our  social  relations  unsafe;  our  slaves  incited  to  in 
surrection;  and  our  persons  and  property  unsafe.  Do  you  tell 
us  to  get  rid  of  the  cause  of  this  state  of  things  ?  No  sooner  do 
we  get  rid  of  it  than  we  destroy  the  prosperity  of  the  South. 

"Then  comes  the  question,  what  will  the  South  do  under  these 
circumstances?  Will  the  South  submit?  Some  men  imagine 
that  she  will.  I  do  not.  (Applause.)  But,  gentlemen,  suppose 
for  a  moment  that  the  South  will  submit.  Granted  that  the  South 
does  submit.  Granted  that  she  thinks  that  the  mere  form  of  the 
Constitution  is  enough  for  her,  even  while  the  spirit  of  it  is  fled, 
even  while  property  is  unprotected  and  the  lives  of  her  people  un 
safe  —  although  her  property  becomes  a  desolation,  her  wealth 
wrested  from  her,  her  fields  burned  up,  her  industry  destroyed; 
what  will  be  the  result  ?  We  become  like  St.  Domingo  or  another 
Jamaica.  We  can  expect  but  the  same  result  as  the  English  have 
experienced  from  her  attempt  to  set  her  slaves  free,  and  to  en 
deavor  and  expect  to  insure  the  same  degree  of  prosperity  with 
these  slaves  free  as  when  they  were  slaves  in  bonds.  The  experi 
ence  of  England  and  of  all  the  countries  on  the  face  of  the  earth  is 
that  if  you  free  the  slaves,  you  can  get  no  work  from  them.  All 
the  evidences  of  history  show  that  to  tamper  with  these  slaves  is 
to  open  a  path  for  bloodshed,  civil  war,  and  desolation.  (Ap 
plause.)  If  these  results  follow  to  us,  what  results  follow  to  you  ? 
Desolation,  also,  to  a  great  extent.  The  employment  of  your 
shipping  gone  to  the  extent  of  three-fourths,  your  warehouses 
desolated  and  empty  to  the  same  extent,  and  your  merchants 
destroyed.  Take  away,  in  fact,  $200,000,000  from  the  $300,- 
000,000,  and  New  York  will  feel  the  effect ;  so  will  Boston  and 
Philadelphia  and  every  manufacturing  city  in  the  country,  with 
all  their  great  interests,  —  all  will  share  the  desolation  of  the  South. 
You  will  also  feel  the  desolating  effects  of  these  things,  though 
perhaps  not  to  so  great  an  extent  as  we  of  the  South. 

"But  it  is  not  the  destruction  of  property  alone  that  is  to  be 
considered.  That  is  the  least  of  the  evils  we  would  have  to  de 
plore,  which  will  follow  the  march  of  the  irrepressible  conflict. 
There  is  the  terrible  war  of  races.  It  is  the  terrible  conflict  be- 


320  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

tween  four  million  of  blacks  and  eight  million  of  whites.  It  is 
the  conflict  that  destroys  civilization,  and  which  will  make  us  the 
enemies  of  that  race  until  we  drench  our  fields  with  the  blood  of 
our  unfortunate  people.  One  or  the  other  of  us  must  go  to  the 
wall.  That,  indeed,  would  be  an  irrepressible  conflict.  (Ap 
plause.) 

"Therefore,  I  say  that  even  if  the  South  did  submit  to  these 
things,  you  will  share  in  the  evils  that  must  follow.  We  may  be 
destroyed,  but  you  will  be  less  powerful,  less  happy,  and  less  pros 
perous.  And  thus  I  presume  this  irrepressible  conflict,  this  great 
scheme  of  destruction  and  desolation,  will  affect  you  as  well  as 
us.  You  may  master  us,  you  may  outvote  us,  and  take  away 
from  us  our  social  relations,  and  leave  us  desolate,  but  you  your 
selves  will  be  in  part  vanquished  by  the  very  means  you  employ 
to  vanquish  us.  Turn  loose  your  hordes  of  a  majority,  your  min 
ions  to  trample  upon  the  rights  of  property  and  the  sacred  relations 
of  society ;  turn  them  loose,  but  beware  you  do  not  meet  the  fate 
of  Act  eon,  who  was  devoured  by  his  own  dogs.  (Applause.) 
You  have  a  society  that  needs  to  be  actuated  by  loyalty  to  law, 
that  needs  to  be  imbued  with  the  fundamental  principles  of  govern 
ment,  that  needs  the  restraints  of  the  law  to  keep  them  observers 
of  the  law  and  obeyers  of  it  as  self-working  machines.  But  allow 
the  elements  of  destruction  which  underlie  your  whole  social  sys 
tem  to  be  disturbed,  loose  the  bonds  which  bind  them,  withdraw 
the  restraints  which  control  them  at  present,  impair  in  their  minds 
all  reverence  to  law  and  the  constitutional  authority,  and  no  power 
on  earth  can  save  you  from  destruction.  Then,  I  tell  you  that 
there  would  be  such  an  upheaving  of  society  as  was  never  heard 
of  before.  It  would  be  like  the  terrible  bursting  forth  of  a  volcano, 
whose  fiery  lava  would  overthrow  and  destroy  you.  (Applause.) 

"But  I  have  said  that  the  South  would  not  submit.  I  have  said 
that  the  South  would  not  and  ought  not  to  submit  to  any  curtail 
ment  of  her  constitutional  rights  and  equality  (applause),  to  any 
denial  of  her  rights  in  the  government.  (Continued  applause.) 
It  is  true  she  is  in  the  minority.  Under  the  forms  of  law  you  could 
do  as  you  pleased  with  her  interests.  But  was  the  Constitution 
made  for  you  to  exercise  your  will  at  pleasure  ?  Was  it  made  only 
that  the  majority  might  oppress  the  minority  ?  ("No  /")  What 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM   L.   YANCEY      321 

was  the  Constitution  made  for  but  as  the  express  assurance  that 
the  strong  should  not  oppress  the  weak  and  trample  them  down  ? 
(Applause.)  The  Constitution  was  an  assurance  to  the  man  who 
had  property  that  he  would  not  be  robbed  of  it,  an  assurance  to 
the  minority  that  the  majority  would  in  all  things  be  governed 
by  the  written  law  and  not  by  the  higher  law.  (Applause.)  Now, 
you  at  the  North  think  that  you  can  do  without  the  Constitution 
in  one  particular.  So  far  as  your  relations  with  the  South  are 
concerned  you  do  without  the  Constitution.  Why?  Because 
you  have  the  strength  and  power  Of  the  government  at  your  back. 
Because  you  have  183  electoral  votes  to  120.  If  you  set  section 
against  section,  you  have  sixty-three  per  cent,  a  majority  over  us. 
You  have  more  votes  than  we  have,  and  therefore  you  have  more 
votes  than  we  have  in  the  Senate.  You  have  more  votes  than  we 
have,  and  therefore  you  have  a  majority  over  us  in  the  House. 
Having  more  votes  than  we  have,  you  can  elect  the  President, 
you  can  reform  the  legislature  and  the  judiciary.  You  have  power 
in  all  the  branches  of  the  government  to  pass  such  laws  as  you  like. 
If  you  are  actuated  by  passion  or  prejudice  or  by  the  desire  of  self- 
aggrandizement,  it  is  within  your  power  as  far  as  physical  power 
goes  to  outnumber  us  and  commit  aggression  upon  us,  and  there 
fore  I  say  you  can  do  without  the  Constitution.  Then  with  a 
majority  in  every  part  of  the  government,  what  have  we  to  look 
to  for  protection?  Not  to  numbers;  there  we  are  weak. 

"But  have  we  not  rights,  or  have  we  no  rights  but  such  as  are 
subject  to  your  will,  but  such  as  you  may  chance  to  give  us?  If 
so,  then  I  say  that  this  is  a  most  despotic  and  tyrannical  govern 
ment  of  ours,  a  despotism  of  the  millions ;  and  for  my  part  I  would 
deem  it  better  and  prefer  to  live  under  the  despotism  of  an  enlight 
ened  king  than  under  the  despotism  of  the  millions.  (Applause.) 

"Then  the  South  has  but  one  thing  to  look  to  for  protection; 
that  is  the  Constitution.  (Applause.)  The  Constitution  was  made 
for  her  protection.  The  Constitution  was  a  compact  entered  into 
on  the  understanding  that  the  majority  should  legislate  and  govern 
according  to  certain  laid-down  laws,  by  the  laws  as  received  from 
the  hands  of  Washington  and  the  other  patriots  of  the  Revolution, 
by  laws  specified  in  the  Constitution.  (Applause.)  Will  the  South 
permit  you  to  trench  upon  the  Constitution  as  given  to  the  country 


322  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

by  the  patriot  fathers,  the  Constitution  which  is  to-day  as  it  was 
then  ?  Your  fathers  then  agreed  to  allow  that  our  fathers  should, 
in  all  time  to  come,  be  governed  by  the  provisions  of  the  Constitu 
tion.  You  may  alter  it,  you  may  change  it,  because  you  have 
a  superior  physical  force  to  us ;  but  there  is  a  certain  feeling  within 
the  breast  of  every  Southern  man ;  that  feeling  is  loyalty  to  the 
fundamental  institutions  of  the  land ;  loyalty  is  the  pride  of  the 
Southern  heart ;  to  this  very  hour  and  to  that  loyalty  and  these 
fundamental  principles  of  government  and  the  Constitution  she 
now  appeals.  (Applause.)  Mind  you,  the  South  asks  for  nothing 
that  is  not  her  right.  She  claims  nothing  from  you  that  is  not  her 
due.  She  stands  upon  the  platform  of  the  Constitution  where  you 
stand,  your  peer,  your  equal.  (Applause.) 

"Whenever  you  propose  by  a  system  of  hocus-pocus  legislation 
indirectly  to  undermine  or  get  rid  of  the  Constitution,  or  to  carry 
it  out  according  to  the  mere  will  of  the  majority,  the  South  will 
hold  up  that  instrument  to  you  and  say  to  you  by  this  you  must 
be  guided,  and  will  further  say  to  you,  that  as  long  as  you  are 
loyal  defenders  and  observers  of  the  Constitution,  you  are  our 
brethren.  But  attempt  to  set  it  aside,  to  trample  it  under  your 
feet,  then  I  tell  you  that  by  that  first  act  of  aggression,  of  invasion 
upon  our  rights,  we  are  free  and  independent.  (Applause.) 
Gentlemen,  God  has  given  that  instinct  to  the  poor  worm  that  when 
it  is  trodden  upon  it  will  turn  upon  the  foot  that  tramples  it.  We, 
thank  God,  are  men,  sentient,  intelligent  men,  who  know  our  rights 
and  who  dare  to  maintain  them.  (Applause.)  In  the  advocacy 
of  our  rights  we  do  not  assail,  nor  do  we  in  any  way  trench  upon, 
your  rights.  In  our  advocacy  of  our  rights  we  simply  ask  of  you, 
gentlemen,  to  curb  your  will,  restrain  that  passionate  desire  for 
the  advancement  of  power,  let  not  a  mere  feeling  of  pride  create 
and  force  an  enmity  against  us.  Rise  to  the  high  elevation  of 
good  and  wise  men,  who  would  do  unto  others  as  they  would  have 
others  do  unto  them.  (Applause.) 

"I  have  been  asked  here  to-night  certain  questions,  which  I 
deem  it  right  to  answer  now,  at  the  present.  One  of  the  questions 
is,  t  Would  you  consider  the  election  of  Abraham  Lincoln  as  Presi 
dent  a  sufficient  cause  to  warrant  the  South  in  seceding  from  the 
Union?7  The  second  is,  'Whether,  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Lincoln 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L.   YANCEY      323 

being  elected,  and  any  of  the  states  attempted  to  secede,  you  would 
support  the  general  government  and  the  other  states  in  maintain 
ing  the  integrity  of  the  Union  ? '  The  first  question  is  a  specula 
tion,  a  political  speculation  at  that.  It  has  nothing  to  do  with  the 
canvass.  I  am  here,  however,  aiding  you  to  prevent  such  a  calam 
ity.  I  am  honestly  endeavoring  to  maintain  the  integrity  of  the 
government  and  the  safety  of  the  Union  at  the  ballot  box.  (Ap 
plause.)  I  am  here  to  aid  you  in  trying  to  prevent  the  election 
of  Abraham  Lincoln,  the  author  of  the  irrepressible  conflict ;  and 
if  others  a,s  faithfully  do  their  duty,  he  will  never  be  elected. 
(Applause.)  I  am  asked,  and  have  been  asked  before,  whether 
I  consider  that  the  election  would  be  a  just  cause  for  the  secession 
of  the  Southern  states.  That  is  a  matter  to  come  after  the  ballot 
box.  (Cheers  and  derisive  laughter,  and  cries,  "  Answer  the  ques 
tion")  Be  quiet,  gentlemen.  Hear  me,  hear  me.  (Great  ex 
citement  and  tumult  and  cries  of  "Order,  order"  from  the  platform.) 
Don't  be  impatient,  gentlemen.  (Increasing  disorder.)  Don't 
be  impatient,  and  above  all  things  keep  your  temper.  (Laughter 
and  applause.)  This  is  not  the  time  to  fight,  certainly.  (Laughter.) 
This  is  the  time  to  vote  and  to  consider  how  to  vote." 
A  voice.  "Let  us  have  an  answer  to  the  question." 
Yancey.  "You  are  impatient,  my  friend.  What  is  the  matter 
with  you?" 

Excited  man  on  the  platform.  "Put  him  out." 
Yancey.  "If  the  gentlemen  are  so  desirous  of  knowing  my 
opinions,  they  ought  to  abide  by  my  decisions  when  uttered. 
(Cheers.)  This  thing  of  asking  advice  of  a  man,  and  then  not 
taking  his  advice,  is  a  monstrous  poor  way  of  getting  along. 
Now,  I  am  going  to  say  this  about  it.  This  question  that  is  put 
to  me  is  a  speculation  as  to  the  future.  It  is  what  I  consider  in 
the  event  of  something  else  happening.  I  hope  to  God  that  that 
will  never  happen,  and  that  the  speculation  will  never  come  to 
a  head.  (Applause.)  I  am  no  candidate  for  the  presidency, 
my  friends  who  wrote  these  questions,  though  some  of  you  seem 
to  have  thought  so,  judging  from  the  manner  in  which  you  have 
treated  me  and  Mr.  Breckenridge.  I  am  no  candidate  for  office, 
and  I  don't  want  your  vote.  But  I  would  like  to  advise  with  you 
and  get  you  to  vote  for  a  good  man  —  for  any  man,  I  do  not  care 


324  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

who  it  is,  excepting  one  of  the  irrepressible  conflict  men.  (Great 
applause.)  In  the  first  place,  there  is  no  such  thing  as  the  South 
seceding.  I  do  not  know  how  you  would  go  about  it.  ("Good" 
and  cheers.)  There  is  such  a  thing  as  a  state  seceding;  but  the 
South  seceding  is  a  thing  that  I  cannot  comprehend.  I  do  not 
know  how  the  South  would  go  about  it.  I  do  not  think  that  it 
would  ever  happen ;  and,  therefore,  I  have  no  answer  as  to  what 
the  South  should  do. 

"Now,  then,  I  am  a  citizen  of  Alabama.  I  am  what  is  called  a 
states'  rights  man.  (Cheers.)  I  believe  in  the  rights  of  my  state. 
The  Constitution  of  my  country  tells  me  that  certain  powers  were 
given  to  the  general  government,  and  that  those  which  were  not 
expressly  given  or  were  not  necessary  to  carry  out  the  powers 
granted,  were  reserved  to  the  states  and  to  the  people  of  the  states. 
My  state  has  reserved  powers  and  reserved  rights,  and  I  believe 
in  the  right  of  secession.  ("Good.")  Virginia  and  New  York 
were  parties  to  that  contract.  When  the  question  was  presented, 
the  state  of  Virginia  expressed  her  willingness  to  join  under  the 
compact.  The  state  of  New  York  also  did  so  through  her  con 
vention.  It  was  provided  that  if  nine  states  assented,  it  would 
be  a  government  for  these  nine  and  for  all  the  states  that  would 
sign  the  compact.  Therefore  the  compact  was  a  compact  between 
the  states  mutually  assenting.  If  any  dissented,  there  was  no 
proposition  to  force  them  into  the  Union.  Therefore,  I  believe 
in  the  right  of  a  state  to  go  out  of  the  Union,  if  she  thinks  proper. 
The  state  of  Alabama  in  her  last  General  Assembly  passed  a  law 
requiring  the  governor  in  the  event  of  a  Black  Republican  being 
elected  President  of  the  United  States,  to  convene,  within  so  many 
days  after  he  ascertained  that  fact,  a  convention  of  the  people  of 
the  state,  for  the  purpose  of  considering  the  question  which  is 
here  presented  to  me.  It  is  a  question  for  the  decision  of  my  state ; 
I  cannot  decide  it.  As  one  of  the  citizens  of  Alabama,  I  shall  abide 
by  the  decision  of  my  state.  If  she  goes  out,  I  go  with  her.  If 
she  remains  in,  I  remain  with  her.  I  could  not  do  otherwise. 
(Laughter  and  applause.) 

"It  is  a  grave  question  for  any  citizen  to  consider  whether  he 
will  dissolve,  or  aid  in  dissolving,  the  bonds  which  connect  his 
state  with  the  government.  It  is  a  grave  question,  but  one  which 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L.  YANCEY     325 

I  hope  God  in  his  providence  will  keep  me  from  considering  by 
the  safety  of  this  government  in  the  election  of  some  man  opposed 
to  this  irrepressible  conflict  party.  (Cheers.)  But  when  the 
time  comes  for  me  to  make  up  my  mind,  I  will  have  deliberate 
consultation  with  my  fellow-citizens  in  Alabama.  You  in  New 
York  have  nothing  to  do  with  it ;  nothing.  Whatever  delibera 
tions  you  choose  to  have,  as  citizens  of  New  York,  on  the  fate  of 
your  state,  will  be  for  yourselves.  I  have  no  interest  in  the  ques 
tion  except  incidentally,  and  have  no  right  to  advise  with  you  or 
to  say  anything  to  you  about  it.  But  upon  this  presidential  ques 
tion  I  have  a  common  interest  with  you,  because  it  is  the  election 
of  one  to  administer  the  government  for  the  next  four  years  for 
my  state  as  well  as  for  yours.  Therefore  it  is  a  common  question 
about  which  I  can  consult  with  you.  But  whether  my  state  or 
any  other  state  shall  go  out  of  the  Union  is  a  question  which  it 
will  be  for  that  state  to  determine.  It  is  not  to  be  determined 
by  arguing  it  before  election.  It  would  be  a  grave  matter  for  me 
to  commit  myself  here,  to  a  crowd  in  New  York,  to  any  policy 
that  might  be  influenced  by  after  events,  by  surrounding  circum 
stances,  by  the  expressed  sympathies  of  large  majorities  of  the 
people  of  New  York  or  other  states  with  the  South.  For  me  here, 
merely  to  gratify  some  personal  antagonist,  to  express  any  opinion 
on  that  point  would  be  folly ;  it  is  the  wildest  folly  to  expect  that 
I  will.  That  opinion  will  be  rendered  to  my  state  whenever  they 
ask  for  it.  ("Three  cheers  for  the  answer.")  1 

"Now,  I  am  asked  one  other  question.  I  am  asked,  whether 
if  any  portion  of  the  South  secedes,  I  will  aid  the  government  in 
maintaining  the  integrity  of  the  Union.  Yes,  my  friends,  the  in 
tegrity  of  the  Union.  (Cheers.)  I  am  now  struggling  for  it  and 
shall  struggle  for  it  to  the  day  of  election.  The  integrity  of  the 
Union  I  shall  struggle  for  with  my  life's  blood,  if  required.  (En 
thusiastic  cheers.)  But  if  this  questioner  meant  by  the  integrity  of 
the  Union  the  preservation  of  any  administration  that  shall  tram 
ple  on  any  portion  of  the  rights  of  the  South,  I  tell  him  that  I  will 
aid  my  state  in  resisting  it  to  blood.  (Great  cheering.)  The  com 
mon  rights  of  resistance  to  wrong  that  belong  to  the  worm,  those 

1  For  his  answer  in  Baltimore,  see  p.  215 ;  see  Breckenridge's  answer, 
pp.  174-175,  and  Douglas',  pp.  180-181. 


326  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

rights  are  not  the  rights  that  were  meant  to  be  secured  by  our 
fathers  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  when  they  cut  them 
selves  loose  from  the  despotism  and  the  despotic  ties  of  the  old 
world.  The  serf  of  Russia  has  got  the  right  of  revolution.  The 
hog  has  got  the  right  to  resist  if  you  try  to  put  a  knife  to  his  throat. 
(Cheers  and  laughter.)  The  right  of  revolution  is  the  poor  serf's 
right.  It  is  no  right  at  all.  It  is  only  the  last  expiring  throw 
of  oppressed  nationality.  (Tumultuous  cheering.)  Yes,  gentle 
men,  there  is  the  poor  degraded  people  that  for  centuries  have 
groaned  under  the  armed  head  of  a  powerful  despotism,  that  knows 
no  rights  in  the  masses  save  the  privilege  of  rendering  up  their 
hard-earned  earnings  in  order  that  the  masters  might  revel  in 
infamous  and  criminal  luxury  and  wealth.  Poor  Italy  is  trying 
to  raise  up  her  bleeding  and  bruised  body,  and  is  now  perchance 
on  one  knee,  and  with  manacled  hands  is  yet  struggling  for  the 
great  right  of  revolution.  (Cheers.) 

"Have  our  fathers  provided  no  better  fate  for  us?  Yes,  they 
have.  They  have  made  this  a  government  existing  on  the  will  of 
sovereign  states,  a  compact  between  sovereign  states,  not  made 
states  by  force,  not  made  consolidated  masses  by  the  conquering 
march  of  a  hero,  with  his  army  at  his  back  and  his  sword  thrown 
into  the  scale,  where  the  will  of  the  conquered  is  not  considered. 
That  is  not  our  form  of  government.  Ours  is  a  form  of  govern 
ment  that  the  people  have  willed.  It  is  self-government.  It  is 
government  where  states  have  willed  to  make  a  compact  writh  each 
other ;  and  whenever  that  compact  is  violated,  who  is  there  higher 
than  the  states?  Who  is  there  more  sovereign  than  the  parties 
to  the  compact  who  have  the  reserved  rights  guaranteed  to  them  ? 
There  are  rights  reserved  to  these  states ;  the  Constitution  itself 
guarantees  them;  and  there  is  the  great  right  that  rises  above 
revolution  —  because  it  is  the  right  of  humanity,  the  right  of  civili 
zation,  the  right  of  an  intelligent  public  opinion,  the  right  of  free 
men  —  and  that  is,  that  when  governments  become  oppressive 
and  subversive  of  the  objects  for  which  they  were  formed,  then, 
in  the  language  of  our  fathers,  they  have  the  right  to  form  a  new 
government.  (Cheers.) 

"Governments  should  not  be  changed  for  light  and  transient 
causes,  but  whenever  the  whole  property  of  an  entire  community 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L.   YANCEY     327 

is  swept  away  by  a  policy  that  undermines  it  or  deals  it  a  death 
blow  directly ;  when  the  social  relations  of  an  enlightened,  virtuous 
and  Christian  people  shall  be  utterly  destroyed  by  a  policy  that 
invidiously  undermines  them,  and  produces  inevitably  a  contest 
between  castes  and  races ;  when  these  rights  are  touched  upon  and 
the  people  see  that  the  attack  is  coming,  they  will  not  wait  until 
the  policy  is  clinched  upon  them.  The  very  moment  their  equality 
is  destroyed  in  the  government  under  the  Constitution,  then,  in 
my  opinion,  it  becomes  the  duty  of  the  state  to  protect  its  people 
by  interposing  its  reserved  rights  between  the  acts  of  the  general 
government  and  its  people.  And  when  it  does  that,  if  Abraham 
Lincoln  or  any  other  man  who  aids  Abraham  Lincoln  or  any 
other  man  in  the  presidential  office  shall  undertake  to  use  Federal 
bayonets  to  coerce  free  and  sovereign  states  in  this  Union  (I  an 
swer  that  question  as  an  individual  because  it  does  not  involve 
my  state),  I  shall  fly  to  the  standard  of  that  state  and  give  it  the 
best  assistance  in  my  power.  (Great  cheers.) 

"But  consider  for  a  moment  where  we  would  be.  Suppose 
Georgia  should  determine  to  secede  in  the  event  of  the  refusal  to 
admit  a  slave  state  into  the  Union.  Georgia  has  deliberately 
resolved  by  her  ordinance  in  convention  —  and  it  is  a  fact  of  her 
constitution  and  irrepealable,  save  as  the  constitution  is  repealable 
—  that  in  the  event  of  the  refusal  to  admit  a  state  into  the  Union 
because  it  is  a  slave  state  (and  that  is  a  part  of  the  irrepressible 
policy),  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  her  government  to  call  a  convention 
of  her  people  together,  and  it  is  made  their  duty  to  go  out  of  the 
LTnion.  That  is  the  law  of  Georgia  and  she  will  resist  to  the  ut 
most,  and  sever  the  last  tie  that  binds  her  to  the  Union.  Now, 
suppose  Georgia  does  that,  that  she  goes  out  of  the  Union.  She 
does  not  hurt  you.  She  does  not  trespass  upon  your  rights.  She 
takes  nothing  with  her  that  belongs  to  you.  She  takes  nothing 
but  what  belongs  to  her.  She  merely  withdraws  from  the  govern 
ment.  Suppose  that  the  Federal  army  was  told  to  march  against 
her,  and  the  navy  told  to  blockade  her  ports,  and  suppose  that 
Georgia  should  be  conquered  by  these  eighteen  million;  is  she, 
then,  a  free  and  sovereign  state  in  the  Union  ?  The  Constitution 
says  that  she  is.  But  will  she  be  so?  She  will  be  a  conquered 
province  of  the  Union.  Would  the  Union  then  be  a  Union  of  the 


328  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

states,  a  Union  under  the  Constitution,  a  Union  of  states  free  and 
equal,  based  on  the  mutual  assent  of  the  people  ?  No ;  it  would 
be  a  military  despotism.  The  very  moment  such  a  thing  occurred, 
the  whole  character  of  the  government  would  be  revolutionized, 
and  the  Cabinet  itself  would  do  what  Georgia  had  not  done  by 
withdrawing.  Georgia,  by  withdrawing,  leaves  you  free  and 
sovereign  and  independent  states  in  the  Union,  and  she  herself 
free  and  sovereign  and  independent  out  of  it.  But  to  force  that 
state  into  submission,  to  keep  her  a  conquered  province,  dissolves 
your  constitutional  government,  provides  for  a  standing  army 
and  entails  the  evils  that  follow  in  the  train  of  a  standing  army.1 
"But,  gentlemen,  this  is  the  time,  this  is  the  place,  this  is  almost 
the  hour  for  you  to  decide  —  what  ?  That  your  Constitution  and 
your  government  shall  not  be  put  to  such  desperate  straits.  This 
is  the  day  and  the  hour  almost  for  you  to  decide  that,  as  men, 
you  will  not  bring  about  a  course  of  events  where  you  will  have 
to  protect  your  Union  by  bayonets,  but  that  you  will,  as  wise  men, 
protect  it  at  the  ballot  box.  That  is  the  genius  of  the  country. 
And  how  are  you  to  do  it?  Vote  for  some  party  or  for  some 
candidate  that  acknowledges  that  the  Southern  states  are  equal 
in  this  Confederacy ;  that  they  are  entitled  at  least  to  protection 
in  this  Confederacy ;  that  they  shall  not  be  trampled  upon ;  that 
no  rights  shall  be  torn  from  them;  that  they  shall  have  equal 
rights  in  forming  new  states  and  in  the  admission  of  new  states ; 
that  they  shall  have  free  and  equal  chance  given  to  their  industry 
and  civilization ;  that  the  civilization  and  industry  of  the  North 
shall  march  side  by  side  with  the  civilization  and  industry  of  the 
South,  in  a  generous,  noble,  enlightened  spirit  of  emulation ;  and 
that  the  bayonet  shall  not  be  thrown  into  the  scale  of  the  North, 
as  the  sword  of  Brennus  was  when  the  fate  of  Rome  hung  in  the 
scale.  (Applause.)  Give  us  a  fair  showing.  It  is  all  we  ask. 
Give  us  an  equal  chance  with  you.  It  is  all  we  ask.  Trammel  not 
our  civilization  and  industry  with  your  schemes  of  emancipation, 
your  schemes  of  abolition,  your  schemes  to  encourage  raids  upon 
us.  Give  us  the  showing  we  give  you.  Hands  off !  Meet  us  in 
generous  rivalry,  and  he  who  conquers  in  the  strife  is  a  conqueror 

1  For  Douglas'  answer,  see  pp.  180-182. 


DEMOCRATIC  SPEECH  BY  WILLIAM  L.  YANCEY     329 

indeed,  because  the  victory  will  be  given  to  him  as  the  just  meed  of 
superior  sagacity,  superior  intelligence,  and  superior  virtue ;  and 
whenever  you  get  to  be  superior  to  the  South  in  these  things, 
gentlemen,  we  will  bow  in  reverence  before  you.  (Applause.) 
"And  now,  my  friends,  let  me  close.  ("Go  on.")  The  events 
of  yesterday  press  heavily  upon  me.  I  acknowledge  that  I  have 
no  exultation.1  I  feel  none.  I  can  feel  none.  I  feel  that  the  Con 
stitution  is  weighed  down  beneath  these  heavy  majorities.  I  feel, 
gentlemen,  that  the  hour  progresses  in  which  these  tests  must  be 
applied,  which  tests  may  be  attended  with  the  rending  of  the  ties 
that  bind  us,  in  the  dissolution  of  the  government  that  has  made 
us  happy  and  prosperous,  and  in  the  destruction  of  that  general 
prosperity  which  is  the  admiration  of  the  civilized  and  Christian 
world.  I  feel  it,  gentlemen.  The  keystone  of  the  arch  of  the 
Union  is  already  crumbling,  and  the  great  fabric  rests  upon  the 
shoulders  of  New  York.  (Cheers.)  In  the  hands  of  New  York 
is  the  decision  of  the  question.  A  more  weighty  question  was  never 
before  you.  One  freighted  with  the  fate  of  societies  and  of  national 
ities  is  on  your  mind.  Peace,  prosperity,  Union,  the  Constitution, 
the  blessings  of  Christian  liberty,  may  depend  upon  the  vote  of 
New  York.  That  vote  may  crush  all  these  things.  That  vote 
may  perpetuate  these  blessings.  That  you  may  be  equal,  gentle 
men,  to  the  great  responsibilities  of  this  occasion,  is  the  prayer 
of  him  who  addresses  you,  and  who  now  bids  you  respectfully 
farewell."  (Great  cheering.) 

1  Pennsylvania  goes  Republican  in  a  state  election. 


APPENDIX  E 

CONSTITUTIONAL  UNION  SPEECH,  BY  W.  G.  BROWN- 
LOW,    KNOXVILLE,    TENNESSEE,    OCTOBER,    1861  * 

"  GENTLEMEN  OF  THE  BELL  AND  EVERETT  CLUB,  AND  FELLOW- 
CITIZENS:  The  Bible  tells,  in  reference  to  a  high  and  holy  theme, 
that  'day  unto  day  uttereth  speech,  and  night  unto  night  showeth 
knowledge/  This  is  emphatically  true  in  regard  to  the  presidential 
election.  The  developments  of  every  day  and  night  add  strength  to 
the  conviction  that  the  presidential  contest  has  narrowed  down  to 
a  choice  between  John  Bell  and  Abraham  Lincoln.  Breckenridge 
has  been  distanced  at  the  start ;  he  let  down  the  first  heat ;  and  it 
is  the  very  madness  of  folly  to  talk  about  electing  him.  The  lead 
ers  of  the  Democratic  party,  who  procured  his  nomination  by  a 
rebellious  faction  at  Baltimore,  took  that  method  of  accomplishing 
a  long-cherished  object,  the  dissolution  of  this  Union  and  the 
'precipitating  of  the  cotton  states  into  a  revolution.' 

"Douglas,  too,  is  out  of  the  question,  really  not  in  the  race. 
He  may  carry  a  few  of  the  Northern  states,  and,  I  think,  will  do 
so;  but  his  election  is  impossible.  His  friends  desire  the  defeat 
of  Lincoln,  first,  because  he  is  a  sectional  candidate,  as  they  say, 
running  upon  the  nigger  issue  alone ;  and  next,  because  he  holds 
the  position  of  a  candidate  for  the  presidency  by  virtue  of  the  prom 
inence  given  to  him  by  Buchanan,  Breckenridge,  and  the  other 
members  of  the  cabinet,  who  ran  him  against  Douglas  for  the 
United  States  Senate,  and  brought  the  whole  patronage  of  the 
government  to  bear  in  his  favor.  Intelligent  Douglas  men  see 
that  Bell  is  the  only  man  who  can  now  defeat  Lincoln.  They 
see  that  Bell  will  carry  nearly  all  the  Southern  states,  if  the  Breck- 

1  Sketches  of  the  Rise,  Progress,  and  Decline  of  Secession,  by  W.  G. 
Brownlow,  Philadelphia  and  Cincinnati,  1862,  p.  191. 

330 


CONSTITUTIONAL  UNION  SPEECH  331 

enridge  party  are  not  bent  upon  the  dissolution  of  the  Union,  and 
their  conservatism  and  devotion  to  the  Union  will  finally  lead  them 
to  the  support  of  Bell. 

"With  these  preliminary  remarks  I  will  proceed  to  address  you 
on  the  subject,  not  of  Mr.  BelFs  record,  but  of  the  record  of 
Breckenridge  and  Lane,  and  of  the  merits  of  the  party  putting  them 
forth  as  candidates. 

"I  charge,  first  of  all,  that  Buchanan's  is  the  most  corrupt 
and  profligate  administration  ever  known  to  this  government 
since  its  organization;  nay,  that  ours  is  the  most  corrupt 
government  in  the  civilized  world,  and  that  this  corruption 
and  profligacy  have  grown  up  under  Democratic  rule ;  for,  with 
the  exception  of  four  years  under  Taylor  and  Fillmore,  the 
Democrats  have  had  the  control  of  the  government  for  the 
last  twenty-four  years. 

"In  1856,  when  out  of  power,  Buchanan  denounced  the  ex 
penditures  of  $40,000,000  under  Fillmore  as  an  outrage,  in  an 
electioneering  letter  he  put  forth,  and  said  that  an  honest 
people  ought  not  to  submit  to  it.  In  power,  when  clothed  with 
authority  to  correct  these  abuses,  he  expended  double  the 
amount ;  for  in  one  year  after  he  was  inaugurated,  he  increased 
the  public  expenditures  to  $80,000,000.  Here  was  economy  with 
a  vengeance !  Nay,  he  found  a  surplus  of  $20,000,000  in  the 
treasury,  but  has  borrowed  until  the  outstanding  debt  is  the  rise 
of  $100,000,000. 

"But,  it  may  be  inquired,  what  has  all  this  to  do  with  voting 
for  or  against  Breckenridge  and  Lane  ?  Much,  every  way.  Breck 
enridge  is  the  tail  end  of  this  miserable  administration,  has  been 
connected  with  its  cabinet  councils  from  the  beginning,  and  is  now 
its  pet  candidate  for  the  presidency.  Old  Joe  Lane  has  stood 
upon  the  floor  of  the  Senate  for  the  last  three  years  and  defended 
its  villainous  measures,  however  monstrous  they  have  been. 
Both  of  these  men,  if  elected,  will  seek  to  hide  its  revolting  de 
formities,  if,  indeed,  they  do  not  carry  out  the  same  lying  and 
thieving  policy.  We  need  a  change.  I  am  sick  of  seeing  it  paraded 
in  foreign  journals  that  the  President  of  the  United  States  is  a 
thief  and  a  liar.  Mr.  Buchanan  has  been  convicted  of  lying  and 
hiding  for  thieves,  as  well  as  of  advising  them  to  steal  from  the 


332  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

government,  by  the  sworn  testimony  of  various  men  of  his  own 
party  before  the  Covode  Committee. 

"As  a  general  thing,  the  Breckenridge  speakers  pass  all  this 
over  as  unworthy  of  notice.  Whilthom,  the  state  elector,  does 
meet  it,  it  is  true,  by  charging  that  John  Bell  and  Judge  Douglas 
voted  for  the  appropriations,  and  thereby  placed  money  within 
the  reach  of  Buchanan  and  his  dishonest  officeholders.  This  is 
a  defense  with  a  vengeance. 

"But  it  will  be  said  that  these  are  mere  assertions.  Let  us, 
then,  have  the  proof.  Here  it  is;  and  it  is  high  Democratic 
authority  and  will  not  be  called  in  question. 

'  When  I  first  entered  Congress,  in  1843,  the  expenses  of  the 
government  were  only  thirty  million  per  annum.  The  country 
had  gone  through  the  expensive  Mexican  War,  with  sixty-three 
thousand  soldiers  in  the  field,  for  thirty  millions,  and  now,  in  the 
time  of  peace,  the  estimates  are  seventy-three  millions !  He 
believed  forty  millions  an  abundance  for  the  national  expense.' 
—  HON.  A.  H.  STEPHENS. 

"'This  government,  sixty-nine  years  of  age,  scarcely  out  of  its 
swaddling  clothes,  is  making  more  corrupt  use  of  money  in  pro 
portion  to  the  amount  collected  from  the  people,  as  I  honestly 
believe,  than  any  other  government  on  the  habitable  globe.' — HON. 
ANDREW  JOHNSON,  of  Tennessee. 

"'I  think  it  is  not  saying  too  much  to  declare  that  this  country 
has  gone  faster  and  further  in  ten  years,  in  extravagance,  than 
most  other  countries  have  gone  in  centuries.'  —  GENERAL  SHIELDS. 

"'Before  God,  I  believe  this  to  be  the  most  corrupt  government 
on  earth.'  —  SENATOR  TOOMBS. 

"'From  the  byways  and  highways  of  the  government  the  rot 
tenness  of  corruption  sends  forth  an  insufferable  stench.  Why 
are  the  people  so  patient  ?  Why  slumbers  the  indignation  of  the 
Democracy  ? '  —  ROGER  A.  PRYOR.1 

"But,  gentlemen,  I  object  to  Breckenridge  on  account  of  his 
antislavery  record;  and,  as  a  Southern  man,  I  would  not  vote 
for  him  even  if  John  Bell  were  not  a  candidate,  and  the  race  were 
between  him  and  Lincoln  !  I,  therefore,  ask  of  you  the  privilege 
of  exhibiting  this  record. 

1  See  pp.  132-141  for  further  treatment  of  the  corruption  of  Buchanan. 


CONSTITUTIONAL  UNION  SPEECH  333 


BRECKENRIDGE  ON  INTERVENTION 

"'The  whole  theory  of  Congressional  intervention  is  a  libel  on 
our  institutions/  —  The  Congressional  Globe,  Vol.  XXIX,  p.  442. 

"  John  C.  Breckenridge  is  the  nominee  of  a  party  claiming  Con 
gressional  protection. 

BRECKENRIDGE'S  IDEA  OF  THE  EFFECT  ON  THE  COUNTRY  OF  THE 
PASSAGE  OF  THE  KANSAS  BILL 

"'No,  sir,  if  we  reject  this  bill,  we  open  up  the  waters  of  bitter 
ness,  which  will  be  sealed  again  in  time,  but  not  until  these  agita 
tors  shall  have  rioted  awhile  in  the  confusions  of  the  country.  We 
blow  high  the  flames  to  furnish  habitations  for  these  political 
salamanders  who  can  exist  only  in  the  fires  of  domestic  strife. 
But  if  it  passes,  the  question  will  be  forever  removed  from  the 
Halls  of  Congress,  and  deposited  with  the  people,  who  can  settle 
it  in  a  manner  answerable  to  their  own  views  of  interest  and 
happiness.'  —  The  Congressional  Globe,  Vol.  XXIX. 

BRECKENRIDGE'S  IDEA  OF  THE  OBJECT  OF  THE   KANSAS  BILL 

"'Then,  sir,  neither  the  purpose  nor  the  effect  of  the  bill  is  to 
legislate  slavery  into  Nebraska  and  Kansas;  but  its  effect  is 
to  sweep  away  this  vestige  of  Congressional  dictation  on  this  sub 
ject,  to  allow  the  free  citizens  of  this  Union  to  enter  the  common 
territory  with  the  Constitution  and  the  bill  alone  in  their  hands, 
and  to  remit  the  decision  of  their  rights  under  both  to  the  courts 
of  the  country.'  —  The  Congressional  Globe,  Vol.  XXIX. 

BRECKENRIDGE  ON  SLAVERY  IN  KANSAS 

"'Among  the  many  misrepresentations  of  the  Kansas-Nebraska 
Bill  perhaps  none  is  more  flagrant  than  the  charge  that  it  proposes 
to  legislate  slavery  into  Kansas  and  Nebraska.  Sir,  if  the  bill 
contained  such  a  feature,  it  could  not  receive  my  vote.  The  right 
to  establish  involves  the  right  to  prohibit;  and,  denying  both, 
I  would  vote  for  neither.'  —  The  Congressional  Globe. 


334  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


J.  C.  BRECKENRIDGE  ON  THE  KANSAS  BILL 

"'Did  not  the  non-slaveholding  states  (generally)  insist  that 
the  true  policy  was  the  prohibition  of  slavery  in  the  territories 
of  the  Union  by  act  of  Congress,  and,  by  consequence,  insist  upon 
applying  this  principle  to  Utah  and  New  Mexico?  Did  not  the 
slaveholding  states,  on  the  contrary,  planting  themselves  on  the 
ground  of  Federal  non-intervention,  resist  this  policy,  and,  by 
consequence,  its  adoption  and  application  to  those  territories? 
And,  after  a  long  and  fearful  struggle,  did  not  the  latter  doctrine 
prevail?  and  was  it  not  carried  into  law  in  the  Utah  and  New 
Mexico  acts?  Did  not  the  public,  the  press,  conventions,  and 
states  hail  the  result  as  a  final  settlement,  in  principle  and  sub 
stance  of  the  subject  of  slavery?'  -  -  The  Congressional  Globe,  Vol. 
XXIX,  p.  441. 

"If  this  is  not  sufficient  to  establish  the  antislavery  proclivities 
of  Breckenridge,  I  will  add  a  few  brief  extracts  from  his  celebrated 
Tippecanoe  speech  in  1856,  delivered  before  ten  thousand  Free- 
soilers,  whose  votes  he  solicited  for  himself  and  Buchanan. 

"'I  am  connected  with  no  party  that  has  for  its  object  the  ex 
tension  of  slavery,  nor  with  any  to  prevent  the  people  of  a  state 
or  territory  from  deciding  the  question  of  its  existence  with  them 
for  themselves/ 

"'I  happened  to  be  in  Congress  when  the  Nebraska  bill  passed, 
and  gave  it  my  voice  and  vote,  and  because  it  did  what  it  did, 
viz. :  it  acknowledged  the  right  of  the  people  of  the  territory  to 
settle  the  question  for  themselves,  and  not  because  I  supposed, 
what  I  do  not  now  believe,  that  it  legislated  slavery  into  the  terri 
tory.  The  Democratic  party  is  not  a  proslavery  party.' 

"Now,  the  Southern  wing  of  the  Democratic  party  indignantly 
rejected  Douglas,  seceded  at  Baltimore,  and  nominated  Brecken 
ridge,  because  Douglas  held  the  very  doctrines  herein  avowed 
by  Breckenridge  !  That  you  may  see  them  in  a  still  more  ridicu 
lous  light,  here  is  the  resolution  adopted  by  the  Douglas  Demo 
cratic  state  convention  of  Illinois,  declaring :  '  Slavery,  if  it  exists 
in  a  territory,  does  not  derive  its  validity  from  the  Constitution 


CONSTITUTIONAL  UNION  SPEECH  335 

of  the  United  States,  but  is  a  mere  municipal  institution,  existing 
in  such  territory  under  the  laws  thereof.' 

"In  1850,  while  Breckenridge  was  a  member  of  the  Kentucky 
legislature,  he  declared,  by  resolution :  — 

"'Resolved,  By  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Commonwealth 
of  Kentucky,  that  the  question  of  slavery  in  the  territories,  being 
wholly  local  and  domestic,  belongs  to  the  people  who  inhabit 
them.' 

"Will  some  one  of  the  Breckenridge  speakers  traveling  through 
this  country,  quoting  garbled  extracts  from  Bell's  record,  and 
misrepresenting  that  able  and  experienced  statesman's  legislative 
course,  show  a  shade  of  difference  in  the  squatter  sovereignty 
principles  set  forth  in  these  two  resolutions  ?  They  both  declared 
slavery  in  the  territories  to  be  local,  and  only  subject  to  the  laws 
thereof. 

"But  'Old  Joe  Lane,'  as  he  is  familiarly  called,  holds  the  same 
doctrine,  and  said  in  one  of  his  speeches :  — 

"'The  question  of  slavery  is  a  most  perplexing  one,  and  ought 
not  to  be  agitated.  We  should  leave  it  with  the  states  where  it 
constitutionally  rests,  and  to  the  people  of  the  territories,  to  pro 
hibit  or  establish,  as  to  them  may  seem  right  and  proper.' 

"Here,  then,  are  two  rank  and  straight-out  squatters,  who  have 
outsquatted  Douglas,  taken  up  by  these  Baltimore  disunionists 
and  seceders  and  run  for  the  presidency  and  vice  presidency,  and 
Douglas  unceremoniously  thrust  aside  because  he  was  a  squatter.1 

"Will  some  Breckenridge  orator  explain  why  it  was  that  Doug 
las  was  set  aside  for  heresy,  and  two  other  gentlemen  selected, 
holding  the  same  heresy  and  hugging  it  closer  ?  The  answer  will 
be,  'Because  we  wanted  our  rights  under  the  Constitution.' 
What  rights?  The  right  to  secede  from  the  Union  and  to  form 
a  Southern  Confederacy.  Of  this  right  and  this  unholy  purpose 
I  shall  have  something  to  say  before  I  close. 

"I  inquire  again,  why  was  Douglas  rejected  and  Breckenridge 

1  For  Douglas'  treatment  of  the  popular  sovereignty  record  of  the 
Breckenridgeites,  see  pp.  95-96. 


336  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

40 

selected  by  the  intense  Southern  wing  of  the  party  ?  I  have  the 
true  answer  to  this  question,  given  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate  on  the 
24th  of  last  May  by  a  distinguished  politician.  I  want  you  to 
hear  it,  and  when  you  hear  it  ask  me  who  he  was :  — 

"'It  is  the  fault  of  the  Democratic  party,  in  dodging  truth, 
in  dodging  the  Constitution  itself,  that  has  brought  the  trouble 
upon  the  country  and  the  party  that  is  experienced  to-day.' 

"Who  said  that  last  May  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate,  and  is 
thus  reported  in  the  Congressional  Globe  f  It  was  '  Old  Joe  Lane ' ; 
and  I  am  glad  that  he  said  it,  in  lieu  of  some  opposition  man; 
for  the  latter  would  have  been  charged  with  abusing  the  Demo 
cratic  party ! 

"Well  might  Herschel  V.  Johnson  of  Georgia  exclaim  in  a  public 
speech  at  Macon  but  the  other  day :  — 

"'This  whole  secession  movement  is  without  justification.  It 
is  not  dignified  by  devotion  to  principle.  It  is  scarcely  redeemed 
from  the  odiousness  of  faction.  Its  highest  attribute  is  that  of 
sheer,  naked,  and  ungenerous  warfare  against  a  great  and  dis 
tinguished  Democrat.  Let  its  authors  bear  the  responsibility 
and  reap  the  coming  retribution.  It  will  come  when  the  popular 
mind  shall  be  awakened  to  its  legitimate  tendencies/ 

"But  I  come  now  to  the  subject  of  disunion.  Thi§  is  a  sore 
subject  with  the  Breckenridge  party,  and  they  are  the  more  sen 
sitive  when  it  is  named  and  prone  to  denunciation  when  it  is 
charged,  because  they  know  and  feel  that  they  are  justly  liable  to 
the  charge.  The  Breckenridge  men  are  not  all  disunionists,  but 
the  unsophisticated  disunionists  are  Breckinridge  men.  The 
states  that  seceded  from  the  regular  Democratic  convention  had 
expressed  themselves  as  favorable  to  disunion  before  the  national 
convention  met  even  at  Charleston.  In  the  debates  at  Charleston 
and  Baltimore  they  showed  that  that  was  their  cherished  project. 

"Many  of  the  leading  men  who  supported  Breckenridge,  in 
different  states,  openly  avow  that  they  are  in  favor  of  disunion 
in  the  event  of  the  election  of  Lincoln,  though  he  might  be  legally 
and  constitutionally  elected,  and  by  a  majority  of  the  American 
voters.  Here  are  a  few  of  their  names :  — 


CONSTITUTIONAL  UNION  SPEECH  337 

Hon.  Jefferson  Davis  of  Missis-  Hon.  L.  P.  Walker  of  Alabama 

sippi  Hon.  Sydenham  Moore  of  Ala- 
Hon.  L.  M.  Keitt  of  South  Caro-  bama 

lina  Hon.  Mr.  Pugh  of  Alabama 

Hon.  Mr.  Curry  of  Alabama  Hon.  D.  Hubbard  of  Alabama 

Hon.  J.  T.  Morgan  of  Alabama  Hon.  Mr.  Gartrell  of  Georgia 

Hon.  J.  L.  Orr  of  South  Carolina  Hon.  Mr.  Crawford  of  Georgia 

Hon.  R.B.  Rhett  of  South  Caro-  Hon.  Mr.    Bonham    of    South 

lina  Carolina 

Hon.  Wm.  L.  Yancey  of  Ala-  Hon.  Mr.  Singleton  of  Missis- 

bama  sippi 

Gov.  J.  J.  Pettus  of  Mississippi  Hon.  R.  Davis  of  Mississippi 

Ex-Governor  McRae  of  Missis-  Hon.  R.  A.  Pryor  of  Virginia 

sippi  Hon.  H.  S.  Bennett  of  Missis- 
Governor  Perry  of  Florida  sippi 

Ex-Governor  McWillie  of  Mis-  Governor  Gist  of  South  Carolina 

sissippi  Hon.  Mr.  Boyce  of  South  Caro- 
Mr.  Dejarnette  of  Virginia  lina 

Hon.  A.  Burt  of  South  Carolina 

"Now,  hear  what  two  of  these  ardent  Breckenridge  men  have 
said.  It  will  be  remembered  that  Hon.  Barnwell  Rhett  said, 
'The  Richmond  convention  is  not  national;  a  national  conven 
tion  is  one  based  on  principles  common  to  all  portions  of  the  United 
States.'  The  Hon.  A.  Burt  said:  'I  have  not  an  element  of  a 
national  Democrat  in  me.  I  was  raised  a  nullifier,  and  should  be 
recreant  to  principle  if  I  were  to  apostatize  and  find  myself  in  the 
ranks  of  the  national  democracy/ 

"Yancey's  scheme  for  'precipitating'  the  cotton  states  into  a 
revolution  you  are  all  familiar  with. 

"  Major  Polk,  Douglas  elector  for  the  state  at  large,  in  speaking 
with  Haynes  and  Peyton,  at  Fayetteville,  August  31,  stated  that 
he  was  prepared  to  prove  by  a  telegraphic  dispatch  that  Brecken 
ridge  and  Lane  were  nominated  by  the  Richmond  seceding  con 
vention  one  hour  before  they  were  at  Baltimore  !  This  plot  ex 
plains  why  the  letter  of  the  Richmond  seceding  convention,  notify 
ing  Breckenridge  of  his  nomination,  was  never  published,  though 
his  letter  of  acceptance  was. 


338  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

"  The  St.  Louis  Republican,  good  democratic  authority,  posi 
tively  asserts,  'The  rupture  at  Charleston  and  Baltimore  is  seen 
to  have  been  a  preconcerted  part  of  the  disunion  program,  con 
cocted  in  the  secret  lodges  of  the  disunion  leagues ;  that  the  plot 
was  deliberately  hatched  there  for  the  disruption  of  the  only  na 
tional  party  organization,  as  an  essential  preliminary  to  'precipi 
tating  the  cotton  states  into  a  revolution/  and  that  by  a  division 
of  the  Democrats  of  the  North,  and  consequent  election  of  Lincoln, 
the  disunionists  hoped  to  "fire  the  Southern  heart"  to  the  work 
of  overthrowing  the  Constitution  and  the  Union.' 

"A  recent  issue  of  the  Huntsville  Democrat,  a  Breckenridge 
organ,  edited  by  a  brother  of  Senator  Clay,  says  :  — 

"'If  we  wait  till  our  enemies  get  control  of  the  power  of  the 
Federal  government,  as  they  now  have  of  the  Northern  state 
governments,  and  have  possession  of  the  purse  and  the  sword,  the 
treasury,  army  and  navy,  then  we  white  men  of  the  South,  who 
wield  the  power  of  slavery,  will  be  in  the  course  of  ultimate  extinc 
tion.  The  war  of  extermination,  as  Douglas  called  the  irrepress 
ible  conflict,  predicted  by  Lincoln  —  already  declared  —  will 
then  have  been  waged.' 

"Hon.  Eli  S.  Shorter,  Breckenridge  elector  in  Alabama,  re 
cently  said  in  a  speech  in  Pike  County,  which  speech  is  reported 
in  the  States  Rights  Advocate :  — 

"'He  took  the  position  boldly,  that  upon  the  election  of  a  Black 
Republican,  upon  a  sectional  platform  and  by  a  sectional  vote, 
he  was  for  a  dissolution  of  the  Union.7 

"The  Columbia  South  Carolinian,  a  Breckenridge  organ  of 
recent  date,  says  :  — 

"'The  Republicans  will  push  forward  in  their  work  and  elect 
their  President,  and,  when  too  late  to  reflect  or  retreat,  will  find 
themselves  face  to  face  with  an  indignant  and  outraged  people, 
with  the  flag  of  revolution  unfurled/ 

"The  Columbus  Times,  Columbus,  Georgia,  a  Breckenridge- 
Yancey  paper,  thus  unfurls  the  flag  of  disunion :  — 

"'We  have  not  postponed  the  issue  indefinitely.     We  are  not 


CONSTITUTIONAL  UNION  SPEECH  339 

going  to  wait  for  an  overt  act  of  aggression  before  resisting  a  Black 
Republican  President.  We  repeat,  there  is  no  issue  of  dissolution 
in  the  platform  of  any  party  now  before  the  country.  We  repeat 
that  when  Lincoln  is  declared  elected  we  shall  appeal  to  the 
"people  to  redress  their  grievance."  We  repeat  all  that  we  have 
ever  said  that  means  resistance  to  Black  Republican  rule,  from 
first  to  last.' 

"Hon.  John  Driver,  of  Russell  County,  Alabama,  an  ardent 
Breckenridge  man,  and  a  member  of  the  Charleston  and  Balti 
more  conventions,  says  in  a  published  card  over  his  signature, 
July  23,  1860,  in  defense  of  a  dissolution  of  the  Union  :  '  To  effect 
this  object,  we,  the  disunion  party,  disrupted  the  Democratic 
convention  at  Charleston,  and  at  Baltimore  induced  others  to 
join  us  by  our  agreeing  to  support  men  not  entirely  of  our  senti 
ments/ 

"James  D.  Thomas,  the  Breckenridge  elector  for  the  Knox 
district,  said  at  Maynardsville,  on  the  28th  ultimo,  that  if  the 
judiciary,  legislative,  and  executive  departments  refuse  protection 
to  slave  property,  he  and  his  party  were  for  secession.  He  said 
that  thing,  and  I  presume  he  represents  his  party  in  Tennessee. 
Governor  Harris  is  committed  to  the  same  odious  and  revolution 
ary  doctrine.  So  are  all  the  disunion  leaders  in  this  state. 

"The  Bell  and  Everett  elector  in  the  state  of  Georgia,  Colonel 
S.  C.  Elam,  has  renounced  the  Union  ticket  and  come  out  in  a 
card  for  Breckenridge;  Colonel  Elam  gives  his  reasons  for  the 
change;  and  I  beg  you  to  hear  those  reasons. 

"He  says  that  Breckenridge  and  Lane  stand  even  a  slimmer 
chance  than  Bell  and  Everett.  Then  why  does  Colonel  Elam 
leave  us?  He  says  that  his  ' controlling  reason'  is  that  'the 
Breckenridge  party  is  pledged  to  dissolve  the  Union  if  Lincoln  is 
elected,'  and  that  l  Breckenridge's  running  renders  Lincoln's  elec 
tion  certain.'  He  thinks  that  'Douglas  might  be  elected  if  Breck 
enridge  was  out  of  the  way,'  but  'Breckenridge  couldn't  beat 
Lincoln  if  Douglas  was  out  of  the  way.' 

"So  here  is  the  whole  game  of  the  Yanceyites.  Colonel  Elam 
has  let  the  disunion  cat  out  of  the  bag.  The  Breckenridge  party 
is  pledged  to  dissolve  the  Union  in  a  certain  contingency,  the  elec- 


340  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

tion  of  Lincoln.  To  make  that  contingency  certain,  they  are 
running  Breckenridge.1 

"Mr.  Bell  owns  eighty-three  slaves  in  his  own  right,  and  his 
wife  owns  just  an  equal  number,  making  in  all  one  hundred  and 
sixty-six,  and  still  he  is  sneeringly  pointed  at  as  unsound  on  the 
slavery  question  !  Mr.  Douglas  owns  no  slaves,  and  never  did 
in  his  own  right,  and  is  a  Northern  man ;  and  he  has  an  electoral 
ticket  in  almost  all  of  the  Southern  states.  Mr.  Breckenridge 
and  family  live  in  Lexington,  and  board  at  the  Phoenix  Hotel, 
and  he  votes  in  that  city,  regarding  it  as  his  home.  For  several 
years  past  he  has  returned  no  property  for  taxation,  either  real 
or  personal,  as  appears  from  the  tax  book,  and  for  the  best  reason 
in  the  world  —  he  has  none.  He  has  a  free  colored  woman  as  a 
nurse,  and  this  is  all  the  connection  he  has  with  slavery ;  and  yet 
he  is  the  proslavery  candidate  for  the  presidency,  and  is  supported 
by  the  .slave  code,  slave  trade,  disunion  party,  as  the  only  man 
prepared  to  do  justice  to  the  South  upon  the  question  of  the 
everlasting  nigger  ! 

"Now,  gentlemen  and  members  of  the  club,  I  am  about  through 
with  the  remarks  I  intended  to  submit  to  you  on  this  occasion. 
Candor  requires  me,  as  the  contest  is  rapidly  drawing  to  a  close, 
to  admit  that  the  chances  are  that  Mr.  Lincoln  will  be  elected. 
If  so,  the  entire  Breckenridge  party  in  the  South  will  go  in  for 
a  Southern  Confederacy.  If  I  am  living,  —  and  I  hope  I  may 
be,  —  I  shall  stand  by  the  Union  as  long  as  there  are  five  states 
that  adhere  to  it.  I  will  say  more ;  I  will  go  out  of  the  Confederacy 
if  the  rebellious  party  sustains  itself.  Nay,  I  will  say  still  more ; 
I  will  sustain  Lincoln  if  he  will  go  to  work  to  put  down  the  great 
Southern  mob  that  leads  off  in  such  a  rebellion ! 

"These  are  my  sentiments,  and  these  are  my  purposes;  and 
I  am  no  abolitionist,  but  a  Southern  man.  I  expect  to  stand  by 
this  Union,  and  battle  to  sustain  it,  though  Whiggery  and  Democ 
racy,  Slavery  and  Abolitionism,  Southern  rights  and  Northern 
wrongs,  are  all  blown  to  the  devil !  I  will  never  join  in  the  outcry 
against  the  American  Union  in  order  to  build  up  a  corrupt  Demo 
cratic  party  in  the  South,  and  to  create  offices  in  a  new  govern- 

1  See  pp.  175-178  for  further  treatment  of  the  secession  proclivities 
of  the  Breckenridgeites. 


CONSTITUTIONAL  UNION  SPEECH  341 

ment  for  an  unprincipled  pack  of  broken-down  politicians,  who 
have  justly  rendered  themselves  odious  by  stealing  the  public 
money.  I  may  stand  alone  in  the  South ;  but  I  believe  thousands 
and  tens  of  thousands  will  stand  by  me,  and,  if  need  be,  perish 
with  me  in  the  same  cause. 

"I  will  conclude,  fellow-citizens,  by  reading  the  following 
document,  which  ought  to  be  published  once  a  year  in  every 
newspaper  in  America,  and  read  out  as  often  from  every  pulpit 
in  the  land,  that  the  real  people  may  see  who  signed  it,  and  what 
they  pledged  themselves  to  stand  by :  — 

"'The  undersigned,  members  of  the  thirty-first  Congress  of 
the  United  States,  believing  that  a  renewal  of  sectional  contro 
versy  upon  the  subject  of  slavery  would  be  both  dangerous  to  the 
Union  and  destructive  of  its  objects,  and  seeing  no  mode  by  which 
such  controversy  can  be  avoided  except  by  a  strict  adherence  to 
the  settlement  thereof  effected  by  the  Compromise  acts  passed  at 
the  last  session  of  Congress,  do  hereby  declare  their  intention  to 
maintain  the  said  settlement  inviolate,  and  to  resist  all  attempts 
to  repeal  or  alter  the  acts  aforesaid,  unless  by  the  general  consent 
of  the  friends  of  the  measure,  and  to  remedy  such  evils,  if  any, 
as  time  and  experience  may  develop. 

"'And  for  the  purpose  of  making  this  resolution  effective,  they 
further  declare  that  they  will  not  support  for  the  office  of  president 
or  vice  president,  or  of  senator  or  representative  in  Congress,  or 
as  a  member  of  the  state  legislature,  any  man,  of  whatever  party, 
who  is  not  known  to  be  opposed  to  the  disturbance  of  the  settle 
ment  aforesaid,  and  to  the  renewal  in  any  form,  of  the  agitation 
upon  the  subject  of  slavery. 

'  Henry  Clay  H.  A.  Bullard 

Howell  Cobb  C.  H.  Williams 

C.  S.  Morehead  T.  S.  Raymond 

William  Duer  J.  Phillips  Phoenix 

Robert  L.  Rose  A.  H.  Sheppard 

H.  S.  Foote  A.  M.  Schermerhorn 

William  C.  Dawson  David  Breck 

James  Brooks  John  R.  Thurman 

Thomas  J.  Rusk  James  L.  Johnson 


342  PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 

Alexander  H.  Stephens  D.  A.  Bokee 

Jeremiah  Clemens  J.  B.  Thompson 

Robert  Toombs  George  R.  Andrews 

James  Cooper  J.  M.  Anderson 

M.  P.  Gentry  W.  P.  Mangum 

Thomas  G.  Pratt  John  B.  Kerr 

Henry  W.  Hilliard  Jeremiah  Morton 

William  M.  Gwin  J.  P.  Caldwell 

F.  E.  McLean  R.  I.  Bowie 

Samuel  Eliot  Edmund  Deberry 

A.  G.  Watkins  E.  C.  Cabell 

David  Outlaw  Humphrey  Marshall 

Alexander  Evans  Allen  F.  Owen'" 


INDEX 


Abolitionists,  their  principles,  3-6,  10-12 ; 
support  John  Brown,  9-14 ;  attacked 
by  the  South,  14-15 ;  persecuted  in 
Kentucky,  19 ;  persecuted  in  the 
South,  19-20 ;  condemned  in  Georgia, 
25 ;  condemned  by  Caleb  Gushing, 
27 ;  condemned  in  Rochester,  New 
York,  27  ;  organization  recommended 
in  the  South,  37 ;  opposition  to  the 
slave  trade,  79. 

Advertisements  of  runaway  slaves,  61. 

Aggression,  political:  I,  Democratic, 
141-197  ;  (a)  .new  policy  of  territorial 
expansion,  141-156,  249 ;  changed 
principles  of  the  Democratic  party  on 
slavery,  156-158 ;  change  in  Congres 
sional  practice,  158-159 ;  change  in 
the  position  of  the  Supreme  Court, 
160;  the  "fathers"  renounced,  161- 
163 ;  (&)  the  aggression  of  secession, 
see  Secession ;  II,  Republican,  on 
slavery,  190-195 ;  III,  comparison  of 
the  two  movements,  195-196. 

Alabama,  supports  William  L.  Yancey 
in  1847,  93 ;  secession  from  Charles 
ton  convention,  107 ;  delegates  re 
jected  by  the  Baltimore  convention, 
108. 

Albany,  New  York,  mourning  for  John 
Brown,  9 ;  Evening  Journal  on  Abra 
ham  Lincoln,  211. 

American  Board  of  Commissioners  for 
Foreign  Missions,  reluctance  to  con 
demn  slavery,  87-88. 

American  Sunday  School  Union,  refusal 
to  condemn  slavery,  87. 

American  Tract  Society,  refusal  to  con 
demn  slavery,  87 ;  mutilation  of 
tracts  for  the  South,  88. 

Americans,  political  party,  refuse  to  vote 
for  John  Sherman  for  speaker  in  the 
House  of  Representatives,  43;  vote  for 
William  Pennington,  44. 

Amesbury,  Massachusetts,  mourning  for 
John  Brown  19. 

Anti-Lecompton    Democrats,    refuse    to 


vote  for  John  Sherman  for  speaker  in 
the  House  of  Representatives,  43 ; 
vote  for  William  Pennington,  44. 

Arkansas,  expells  free  negroes,  82-83 ; 
support  slavery  in  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church,  86 ;  secedes  from 
the  Charleston  convention,  107  ;  dele 
gates  to  Baltimore  convention,  105. 

Asheville,  North  Carolina,  expells  abo 
litionist,  21. 

Atlanta  Confederacy,  hostile  to  Northern 
ers,  19  ;  supports  Stephen  A.  Douglas 
and  secession,  185. 

Auburn,  New  York,  fugitive  slave  re 
ported,  66. 

Augusta,  Georgia,  expells  James  Cran- 
gale,  20 ;  the  Chronicle  on  burning  of 
slaves,  60. 

Baltimore,  Maryland,  effect  of  the 
Impending  Crisis  on  Police  Com 
missioners,  45-46 ;  effect  on  street 
railway  charters,  46 ;  adjourned  ses 
sions  of  Democratic  convention,  108 ; 
speech  by  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  182, 
215. 

Bangor,  Maine,  refusal  by  Stephen  A. 
Douglas  to  commit  himself  on  slav 
ery,  184. 

Banks,?  Nathaniel  P.,  speaker  of  the 
House  of  Representatives,  1856,  43  ; 
candidate  for  Republican  presidential 
nomination,  122. 

Banners  of  parties,  230. 

"Barbarism  of  slavery,"  speech  by 
Charles  Sumner,  56-58. 

Barksdale,  William,  encounter  with 
Owen  Love  joy  of  Illinois  in  the  House 
of  Representatives,  49. 

Batavia,  New  York,  Republican  trans 
parencies,  227. 

Bates,  Edward,  candidate  for  Republi 
can  presidential  nomination,  122. 

Beecher,  Henry  Ward,  suggested  preach 
ing  in  Virginia,  19 ;  on  redemption  of 
slaves,  64 ;  defends  American  Board 
of  Commissioners  for  Foreign  Mis- 


343 


344 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


sions,  88 ;  ridicules  American  Tract 
Society,  88;  on  "irrepressible  con 
flict,"  118,  note. 

Bell,  John,  Constitutional  Union  candi 
date  for  the  presidency,  131,  note; 
favors  moderation  and  compromise, 
179 ;  criticism  of  his  position,  186 ; 
straddle  on  slavery,  186-187 ;  general 
characterization,  212  ;  agrees  to  with 
draw  on  conditions,  224 ;  popular 
vote,  233. 

Benjamin,  Judah  P.,  attacks  Stephen  A. 
Douglas,  102-103. 

Berea,  Kentucky,  expels  abolitionists, 
19. 

Bible,  texts  on  slavery,  15-16. 

Blackwood's  Magazine,  on  international 
influence  of  cotton,  169. 

Blair,  Frank  P.,  prominent  in  Republi 
can  national  convention,  131. 

Bocock,  Thomas  S.,  candidate  for 
speaker  of  the  House  of  Representa 
tives,  33. 

Booth,  Sherman  M.,  prosecuted  for  rescue 
of  a  fugitive  slave,  67-69. 

Border  states,  part  in  national  politics, 
115;  opposition  to  the  foreign  slave 
trade,  79 ;  support  slavery  in  the 
Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  85-86. 

Boston,  Massachusetts,  wealth  compared 
with  that  of  North  Carolina,  35  ;  fugi 
tive  slave  reported,  66 ;  speech  by 
William  L.  Yancey,  215-217;  Re 
publican  parade  and  transparencies, 
227. 

Boyce,  William  W.,  favors  secession,  178. 

Branch,  Lawrence  O.,  challenges  Ga- 
lusha  A.  Grow  to  a  duel,  43. 

Breckenridge,  John  C.,  Vice  President 
of  the  United  States,  praises  popular 
sovereignty,  1852  and  1856,  95; 
nominated  for  the  presidency,  109 ; 
sudden  support  of  the  Supreme  Court, 
153 ;  only  slight  opposition  to  seces 
sion,  174-175,  184-185 :  general  char 
acterization,  212  ;  agrees  to  withdraw 
on  conditions,  224 ;  popular  vote, 
233  ;  on  popular  sovereignty,  333-334. 

Brown,  Albert  G.,  United  States  Sena 
tor,  on  territorial  expansion,  148. 

Brown,  John,  abolition  attack  on  Harp 
er's  Ferry,  2 ;  record  in  the  West,  2 ; 
estimates  by  enemies,  2 ;  interviewed 
by  newspaper  reporter,  3 ;  his  moral 
defense,  4 ;  his  trial,  4-5 ;  speech  to 
the  court,  5 ;  in  prison,  6 ;  attitude 


on  slavery,  6;  letters  to  his  family; 
6-8;  repulses  Southern  clergymen,  8; 
execution.  8 ;  celebrations  of  his  mar 
tyrdom,  99 ;  defense  by  William  Lloyd 
Garrison,  10 ;  alleged  insanity,  13 ; 
supported  by  abolitionists,  9-14 ; 
opposed  by  Southern  states,  14-26 ; 
opposition  of  South  Carolina,  24; 
opposition  of  citizens  of  Georgia, 
24-26 ;  opposition  of  Democrats  of 
the  North,  26-29  ;  inspired  by  William 
H.  Seward,  28 ;  inspired  by  civil  war 
in  Kansas,  28-29 ;  sxipported  by  Re 
publican  papers,  30-31 ;  general  in 
fluence  on  politics,  31-32 ;  raid  in 
vestigated  by  the  United  States  Sen 
ate,  51-52 ;  influence  on  the  popular 
discussion  of  slavery,  59-61 ;  influ 
ence  on  the  condition  of  the  free  ne 
groes,  82-85 ;  aspersed  by  the  Re 
publican  platform,  125 ;  imitations 
would  follow  under  Republican  rule, 
164. 

Brown,  John,  Jr.,  evades  arrest,  52-53. 

Brownlow,  W.  G.,  encounter  with  Wil 
liam  L.  Yancey,  180  ;  favors  coercion, 
180 ;  speech  at  Knoxville,  Tennessee, 
330. 

Bryant,  William  Cullen,  on  John  Brown, 
30;  advice  to  candidate  Lincoln,  212; 
speech  after  election,  234-235. 

Buchanan,  James,  President  of  the 
United  States,  sends  troops  to  Harp 
er's  Ferry,  2 ;  favors  pardon  for  all 
convicted  of  engaging  in  foreign  slave 
trade,  78 ;  returns  captured  blacks  to 
Africa,  81 ;  praises  popular  sovereignty 
in  1856,  95 ;  praises  Dred  Scott  deci 
sion  in  I860,  101;  Pittsburg  letter, 
133 ;  opposition  to  Covode  Investi 
gation  Committee,  133-134,  140-141 ; 
corruption,  134-141,  331-332;  profes 
sions  of  honesty,  140-141 ;  favors 
annexation  of  Cuba,  141-142 ;  Mexi 
can  policy,  142-146 ;  opposes  Su 
preme  Court  in  1841,  154  ;  unfriendly 
to  coercion,  173 ;  loss  of  physical 
powers  and  popularity,  218-219 ; 
pathetic  campaign  speech,  219-220 ; 
threat  to  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  224, 
287 ;  attacks  on  his  character  in  the 
campaign,  231. 

Burlingame,  Anson,  advises  Illinois 
Republicans  to  support  Stephen  A. 
Douglas,  101 ;  desires  abolition  of 
slavery,  193. 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


345 


Burning  of  slaves,  59-60. 

Butler,  Benjamin  F.,  signs  minority 
platform  at  Democratic  convention, 
106. 

Calhoun,  John  C.,  denies  approval  of 
Missouri  Compromise,  159,  note ;  sel 
dom  mentioned  in  the  campaign,  220. 

California,  lost  to  the  South,  96;  sup 
ports  the  South  in  Democratic  national 
convention,  106 ;  small  Lincoln  ma 
jority,  233. 

Cameron,  Simon,  candidate  for  Republi 
can  presidential  nomination,  122. 

Campaign,  general  characteristics,  230- 
232. 

Campaign  arguments,  corruption,  132- 
141 ;  political  aggression,  141-197 ; 
tariff,  197-198;  internal  improve 
ments,  198-199  ;  Pacific  railroad,  199- 
201 ;  Pacific  telegraph,  201 ;  home 
stead  act,  201-204. 

Cass,  Lewis,  presidential  candidate  in 
1848,  93. 

Charleston,  South  Carolina,  industrial 
conditions  compared  with  those  of 
Philadelphia,  35 ;  treatment  of  free 
negroes,  84 ;  Democratic  national 
convention,  106  ;  seceder's  convention 
107;  William  L.  Yancey  predicts  a 
Southern  Confederacy,  178,  note ;  the 
Mercury  on  Abraham  Lincoln,  210 ; 
the  Mercury  on  prosecution  of  North 
ern  men  in  the  South,  216. 

Charlestown,  West  Virginia,  aids  Harp 
er's  Ferry,  2  ;  trial  of  John  Brown,  4. 

Chase,  Ormund,  killed  in  Mexico,  143. 

Chase,  Salmon  P.,  his  presidency  as  an 
inciting  cause  of  secession,  42 ;  candi 
date  for  Republican  presidential  nomi 
nation,  122. 

Chestnut,  James,  excoriates  Charles 
Sumner  in  the  United  States  Senate, 
57-58. 

Chicago,  the  Tribune  story  of  a  slave 
kidnapping  case,  72 ;  the  Herald 
would  absorb  Mexico,  145  ;  the  Demo 
crat  would  destroy  slavery,  191 ;  Re 
publican  majority,  233. 

Childs,  Lydia  M.,  attack  on  slavery  15- 
19. 

Churches,  attitude  on  slavery,  85-89 ; 
Methodist  Episcopal,  85-87;  Bap 
tist,  Congregational,  Free  Will  Bap 
tist,  Presbyterian,  Protestant  Epis 
copal,  United  Brethren,  United  Pres 
byterian,  Wesleyan  Methodist,  87. 


Church  services,  disturbed  by  John 
Brown's  career,  26. 

Cincinnati,  arrival  of  expelled  aboli 
tionists  from  Kentucky,  19;  fugitive 
slave  reported,  66;  habeas  corpus 
refused  to  slave,  69 ;  kidnapping  of 
free  negroes,  71 ;  arrival  of  exiled  free 
negroes  from  Arkansas,  82 ;  speech 
by  William  L.  Yancey,  215. 

Civilizing  influence  of  slavery,  50,  61-62, 
80. 

Clark,  John  B.,  opposes  Impending 
Crisis  in  the  House  of  Representa 
tives,  33. 

Clay,  C.  C.,  on  the  decline  of  Southern 
agriculture,  37. 

Clay,  Cassius  M.,  candidate  for  Repub 
lican  presidential  nomination,  122 ; 
for  abolition  of  slavery,  139. 

Clay,  Henry,  on  slavery,  40,  162 ;  rever 
ently  mentioned  in  the  campaign,  220. 

Cleveland,  Ohio,  public  meeting  on  the 
date  of  John  Brown's  execution,  9. 

Cobb,  Howell,  speaker  of  the  House  of 
Representatives,  1849,  43 ;  praises 
popular  sovereignty,  1856,  95 ;  fears 
after  rupture  of  Charleston  conven 
tion,  108. 

Coercion,  opposition  of  William  L. 
Yancey,  166 ;  not  feared  from  Bu 
chanan,  173  ;  expected  from  Lincoln, 
173  ;  favored  by  W.  G.  Brownlow,  180  ; 
seldom  noticed  by  the  Republicans, 
188 ;  supported  by  Stephen  A.  Doug 
las,  296. 

Columbia,  South  Carolina,  expulsion  of 
James  Powers,  20. 

Columbus,  Georgia,  Chronicle,  slave 
burning  case,  60. 

Columbus,  Ohio,  disturbance  of  church 
service  over  John  Brown,  26. 

Commercial  intercourse  between  the 
North  and  the  South,  23,  36,  315-319. 

Comonfort,  Mexican  general,  142. 

Comparison  of  the  North  and  the  South, 
by  Hinton  Rowan  Helper,  34-40,  by 
Charles  Sumner,  57 ;  and  by  William 
L.  Yancey,  306-309. 

Compromise,  renounced  by  citizens  of 
Georgia,  25;  and  by  the  South  in 
genera),  105;  supported  by  candidate 
Bell,  179. 

Congress,  power  over  territories  denied, 
96;  the  record  of  Congressional  con 
trol  over  territories  before  the  Dred 
Scott  decision,  158-159. 


346 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


Congress:  I,  Senate,  struggle  over  pun 
ishment  of  contumacious  witness,  53- 
54 ;  foregoes  legislation  till  organiza 
tion  of  the  House,  54-55.  II,  House 
of  Representatives,  contest  over  the 
speakership,  33-45  ;  architectural  ar 
rangement  of  seats,  41 ;  threats  of 
secession,  41—42 ;  quarrels  of  mem 
bers,  42-43,  51 ;  rules  for  speakership 
election,  43  ;  speaker  practically  does 
not  appoint  his  committees,  44,  note ; 
investigation  of  the  Executive,  132- 
141 ;  censure  of  a  Cabinet  member. 
136 ;  possibility  of  a  House  election 
of  the  President  of  the  United  States, 
221-223. 

Connecticut,  personal  liberty  law,  67 ; 
suffrage  denied  to  free  negroes,  85 ; 
resolutions  on  territorial  slavery  in 
1847,  157 ;  small  Breckenridge  vote, 
233. 

Constitution,  interpretation  dependent 
on  predominant  interests,  255-256 ; 
interpretation  of  slavery  clauses  by 
Yancey,  304-306. 

Constitutional  Union  party,  nomina 
tions,  131,  note;  platform,  242;  gen 
eral  criticism  by  Carl  Schurz,  256-257  ; 
see  Campaign  arguments,  Bell,  Ever 
ett,  Secession,  etc. 

Convention,  Democratic  national,  92- 
116;  preceding  factional  debates,  92- 
106 ;  the  Charleston  sessions,  106- 
107  ;  struggle  over  the  platform,  106- 
107  ;  historical  review  of  conventions, 
109,  note;  fruitless  balloting,  107 
the  seceders'  convention,  107,  109 
the  Baltimore  sessions,  108-109 
Douglas  platform,  240  ;  Breckenridge 
platform,  241 ;  questions  in  dispute, 
109-115;  power  of  a  convention  to 
reject  a  report  of  a  committee,  109- 
110;  two -thirds  rule,  110-112,  111, 
note;  unit  rule,  112-113;  bolting,  25, 
113  ;  power  of  the  national  committee 
to  nominate,  113-114;  general  ob 
servations,  114;  why  the  Southern 
states  sent  delegates  to  Baltimore,  114- 
115  ;  purpose  of  the  Charleston  seces 
sion,  115-116;  the  alleged  plot  to  dis 
rupt  the  convention,  196-197. 

Convention,  Republican  national,  117- 
131 ;  reasons  for  Seward's  defeat,  117- 
122 ;  candidates,  122 ;  composition, 
123;  method  of  voting,  123;  plat 
form,  124-125,  237;  the  nominations, 


125-126;  the  candidate,  126-130; 
influence  of  the  crowd,  130-131. 

Convention  of  Southern  states  proposed, 
24. 

Corruption  in  administration,  attacked 
in  Republican  platform,  125 ;  an 
issue  in  the  campaign,  132-141 ;  the 
Covode  Committee,  132-136;  in  the 
departments,  136-141 ;  on  small  scale 
in  the  political  campaign,  230 ;  Bell- 
Everett  charges,  331-332. 

Cotton,  volume  of  crop,  167;  prices, 
167  ;  international  influence,  168—170. 

Courts  of  law  and  slavery,  16-17. 

Crangale,  James,  expulsion  from  Au 
gusta,  Georgia,  20. 

Crawford,  Martin  J.,  threatens  secession 
in  Congress,  42. 

Crittenden,  John  J.,  criticizes  Buchanan 
policy  of  territorial  expansion,  148- 
149. 

Cuba,  contemplated  annexation,  141— 
142 ;  inevitably  lost  under  a  Repub 
lican  administration,  163. 

Curry,  J.  L.  M.,  threatens  secession  in 
Congress,  42  ;  favors  secession,  178. 

Curtin,  Jeremiah,  Republican  candidate 
for  governor  in  Pennsylvania,  126 ; 
opposition  to  candidacy  of  William  H. 
Seward,  126. 

Curtis,  George  W.,  part  in  Republican 
convention,  131. 

Gushing,  Caleb,  on  abolitionists,  27; 
chairman  of  the  Democratic  conven 
tion  at  Charleston,  106. 

Danvers,  Massachusetts,  mourns  for 
John  Brown,  9. 

Davis,  Henry  W.,  censured  by  the  legis 
lature  of  Maryland,  46. 

Davis,  Jefferson,  author  of  Senate  reso 
lutions  on  Democratic  policy,  102 ; 
favors  secession,  178. 

Davis,  Reuben,  for  secession,  178. 

Declaration  of  Independence,  in  Repub 
lican  platform,  123,  131. 

Defense  of  slavery,  61-63. 

Delaware,  supports  slavery  in  the 
Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  85 ; 
sends  delegates  to  the  seceders' 
Democratic  convention,  107 ;  small 
Republican  vote,  233. 

Democratic  factions,  origin,  92-93; 
failure  to  secure  harmony  in  1848,  93  ; 
failure  of  Compromise  of  1850  to 
secure  harmony,  94  ;  lack  of  harmony 
in  1852,  94 ;  reconciliation  attempted 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


347 


by  Stephen  A.  Douglas  in  1854, 94;  pop 
ularity  of  this  step  in  1856,  94-08  ;  Su 
preme  Court  attempts  a  new  reconcil 
iation  in  the  Dred  Scott  decision,  96-97 ; 
disputes  over  the  Dred  Scott  case,  97 ; 
clash  over  the  Lecompton  constitu 
tion,  99-101 ;  quarrels  of  1860  before 
the  convention,  101-103 ;  Stephen 
A.  Douglas*  stand  on  the  John  Brown 

"raid,  103-104;  the  quarrel  irrecon 
cilable',  104-106. 

Democratic  party,  Breckenridge,  criti 
cism  by  Carl  Schurz,  261-262;  see 
Conventions,  John  C.  Breckenridge, 
Joseph  Lane,  Campaign  arguments, 
Secession,  Aggression,  etc. 

Democratic  party,  Douglas,  see  Conven 
tions,  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  Herschel 
V.  Johnson,  Campaign  arguments,  Se 
cession,  Aggression,  etc. 

Detroit,  Michigan,  threatens  South 
erners  traveling  in  the  state,  69-70. 

District  of  Columbia,  supports  slavery 
in  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church, 
85-86 ;  not  mentioned  in  the  Repub 
lican  platform,  125. 

Douglas,  Stephen  A.,  leader  of  a  Demo 
cratic  faction,  92 ;  Kansas-Nebraska 
act,  94 ;  estimate  of  the  position  of 
candidate  Breckenridge,  95-96 ;  de 
serted  by  the  South,  96 ;  rejects  Dred 
Scott  decision,  97 ;  delivers  Freeport 
doctrine,  97-98 ;  considers  joining 
Republican  party,  100-101 ;  attacked 

%  in  the  United  States  Senate,  102-103 ; 
speech  on  Harper's  Ferry  raid,  103- 
104 ;  failure  to  be  nominated  at 
Charleston  convention,  107 ;  nomi 
nated  at  Baltimore,  109 ;  expansion 
ist,  141 ;  on  supremacy  of  white  men, 
152  ;  neutral  position  on  slavery,  161, 
184;  opposition  to  secession,  180- 
183 ;  favors  coercion,  181 ;  welcomes 
chance  to  stand  against  secession 
183-184;  character  sketch,  205-206; 
presidential  ambitions,  206-207  ;  cam 
paign  tour  of  the  country,  207  ;  charac 
terized  by  Artemas  Ward,  207-209; 
expresses  respect  for  Abraham  Lin 
coln,  212 ;  opposes  fusion,  224 ;  re 
fuses  to  withdraw  from  presidential 
campaign,  224  ;  attacks  Buchanan  on 
the  spoils  system,  224 ;  predicts 
Lincoln's  election,  233  ;  popular  vote, 
233  ;  speech  in  full  at  Raleigh,  North 
Carolina,  276. 


Dred  Scott  decision,  96-97;  accepted 
by  the  South,  96-97;  rejected  as  a 
platform  of  the  Douglas  Democratic 
party,  106 ;  menace  to  the  free  states, 
155-156 ;  repetition  improbable  under 
a  Republican  administration,  164 ; 
Stephen  A.  Douglas  supports  it  in 
the  South,  290-291. 

Edgefield,  South  Carolina,  constitution 
of  the  Minute  Man,  230. 

Education,  of  slaves,  17 ;  comparison  of 
conditions  in  the  North  and  in  the 
South,  252-255. 

Elections,  spring,  120;  early  fall,  232; 
November,  233. 

Electoral  colleges,  customary  institu 
tions,  223. 

Emblems  of  party,  Democratic  rooster, 
230  ;  Republican  elephant,  230. 

Evarts,  William  M.,  on  the  Lemmon 
case,  70-71,  71,  note;  supports  Re 
publican  candidacy  of  William  H. 
Seward,  126. 

Everett,  Edward,  Constitutional  Union 
vice-presidential  candidate,  131,  note; 
antislavery  record,  187. 

Expansion,  territorial,  141-163 ;  Cuba, 
141-142;  Mexico,  142-146;  Para 
guay,  146 ;  Nicaragua,  147 ;  criti 
cisms,  148-149  ;  the  consequent  spread 
of  slavery  to  the  territories,  149-153 ; 
the  part  of  the  Supreme  Court,  153- 
155 ;  the  consequent  spread  of  slav 
ery  to  the  free  states,  155-156;  the 
part  of  the  foreign  slave  trade  in  the 
expansionist  program,  156. 

'Fathers"  of  the  Republic,  renounced 
by  the  Democratic  party,  161-163. 

Fessenden,  William  Pitt,  candidate  for 
Republican  presidential  nomination, 
122. 

Fillmore,  Millard,  views  on  John  Brown, 
28-29  ;  inconspicuous  in  the  campaign, 
218. 

Fisk,  Small  H.,  expulsion  from  the  South, 
20. 

Fitzpatrick,  Benjamin,  Breckenridge 
Democratic  vice  presidential  candi 
date,  109. 

Flag  raisings,  230. 

Fleetwood's  Life  of  Christ,  circulation 
forbidden  in  Alabama,  21. 

Florida,  veto  of  bill  on  free  negroes,  83 ; 
secession  from  Charleston  convention, 
107 ;  represented  in  Richmond  conven 
tion,  108 ;  its  territorial  laws  submitted 


348 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


to  Congress,  159 ;  Supreme  Court 
decision  on  power  of  Congress  over 
territories,  160 ;  right  to  secede,  173. 

Forney,  John  W.,  refuses  to  vote  for  the 
Lecompton  constitution,  138. 

Frank  Leslie's  Illustrated  Weekly,  pic 
ture  of  John  Brown's  execution,  9 ; 
views  on  absorption  of  Mexico,  145. 

Free  negroes,  condition,  71,  82 ;  victims 
of  kidnappers,  71 ;  laws  for  their 
oppression,  82-85. 

Freeport,  Illinois,  "Freeport"  doctrine 
of  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  98 ;  Southern 
explanation  of  the  same  by  Douglas, 
289-290. 

Free  speech,  denied  in  the  South,  19- 
22,  215-217,  245-246;  practice  in  the 
North,  252-253. 

Free  states,  threatened  by  slavery 
155-156;  saved  to  freedom,  163-164. 

Fremont,  John  C.,  inconspicuous  in  the 
campaign,  218. 

Fugitive  Slave  Law,  "Union-saving"  meets 
following  its  enactment,  29;  its  ap 
plication,  65-66;  not  mentioned  in  the 
Republican  platform,  125;  Southern 
position,  248. 

Fugitive  slaves,  source  of  information 
on  slavery,  18;  Owen  Love  joy  on  their 
rescue,  65;  cases  of  rescues,  65-66, 
67-69;  flight  northward,  66;  rendered 
up  to  the  South,  66;  probable  increase 
of  the  movement  if  Republicans 
come  into  power,  164;  Southern  inter 
pretation  of  the  constitutional  as 
pects  of  the  case,  306;  humorous 
question,  316. 

Fusion,  extent,  223;  lack  of  moral  prin 
ciple,  224;  defeat,  233. 

Galena,  Illinois,  kidnapping  case,  71. 

Garibaldi,  compared  to  William  Walker, 
147. 

Garrison,  William  Lloyd,  on  John  Brown, 
10. 

Gartell,  Lucius  J.f  threatens  secession 
in  Congress,  42. 

Georgetown,  Massachusetts,  mourns  for 
John  Brown,  9. 

Georgia,  supports  William  L.  Yancey 
in  1847,  93;  secedes  from  Charleston 
convention,  107;  sends  delegates 
to  Baltimore,  108;  cession  of  lands  to 
Congress,  159. 

Giddings,  Joshua  R.,  in  Republican 
convention,  131;  for  abolition  of  slavery, 
193. 


Gist,  William  H.,  for  secession,  178. 

Glover,  Joshua,  a  fugitive  slave  rescued, 
67-69. 

Graf  ton,  Illinois,  kidnapping  case,  71. 

Greeley,  Horace,  on  Southern  trade  with 
the  North,  23;  on  John  Brown,  30; 
on  Thaddeus  Hyatt,  54;  on  burning 
of  slaves,  60;  on  redemption  of  blacks 
from  slavery,  63-64;  on  fugitive  slaves 
64—65;  ridicules  proslavery  Ameri 
can  Tract  Society,  88;  advice  to  Illi 
nois  Republicans  to  elect  Stephen 
A.  Douglas  to  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States,  101;  opposes  William  H.  Seward, 
121-122,  126,  130,  note;  will  not  touch 
slavery  in  the  states,  163;  desires  aboli 
tion  of  slavery,  192-193;  favors  Pa 
cific  Railroad,  199-201;  characteriza 
tion,  220-221;  general  estimate  of 
the  campaign,  231. 

Greenfield,  Massachusetts,  report  of  a 
fugitive  slave,  66. 

Grow,  Galusha  A.,  candidate  for  the  speak- 
ership  in  the  House  of  Representatives, 
33 ;  challenged  to  a  duel,  43. 

Guthrie,  James,  candidate  for  Demo 
cratic  presidential  nomination,  107. 

Hale,  John  P.,  candidate  for  Republican 
presidential  nomination,  122;  favors 
abolition  of  slavery,  193. 

Hambleton,  J.  P.,  for  secession,  185. 

Hamlin,  Hannibal,  Republican]  vice 
presidential  candidate,  129,  note. 

Hannibal,    Missouri,   theft  of  slaves,  71. 

Harper's  Ferry,  attack  by  John  Brown,  1; 
military  defense  by  Governor  Wise, 
22. 

Harper's  Weekly,  picture  of  Republican 
campaign  parade,  226. 

Hartford,  Connecticut,  newspaper  sen 
timent  on  John  Brown,  31. 

Havana,  Cuba,  slave  market,  74. 

Haverhill,  Massachusetts,  mourns  for 
John  Brown,  9. 

Helper,  Hinton  Rowan,  writes  Impend 
ing  Crisis,  34. 

Henry,  Patrick,  on  slavery,  40. 

Heroes  fof  antislavery,  John  Brown,  13; 
Hinton  Rowan  Helper,  34;  Daniel 
Worth,  46;  Thaddeus  Hyatt,  52-54; 
John  Hossack,  65-66;  Sherman  M. 
Booth,  67-69. 

Hickman,  John,  on  Stephen  A.  Douglas, 
104. 

High  Point,  North  Carolina,  burning  of 
copies  of  Impending  Crisis,  46. 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


349 


Homestead  Act,  in  Republican  platform 
125;  arguments  for  and  against,  201- 
204,  250. 

Hossack,  John,  rescues  fugitive  slaves, 
65-66. 

"House  divided  againsx  itself,"  127; 
criticism  by  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  292. 

Houston,  Texas,  Telegraph  on  Abraham 
Lincoln,  210-211. 

Howe,  Samuel  G.,  supporter  of  John 
Brown,  13. 

Hugo,  Victor,  on  John  Brown's  trial,  12. 

Hunter,  R.  M.  T.,  candidate  for  Demo 
cratic  presidential  nomination,  107. 

Hyatt,  Thaddeus,  imprisoned  by  United 
States  Senate,  53-54 ;  opinion  of  Horace 
Greeley,  54. 

Illinois,  refuses  extradition  to  Southern 
states,  69;  laws  on  free  negroes,  84; 
opposes  William  H.  Seward  in  Repub 
lican  convention,  126;  on  territorial 
slavery  in  1847,  157;  small  Brecken- 
ridge  vote,  233. 

Impending  Crisis  denounced  by  Dem 
ocrats  in  the  House  of  Representa 
tives,  33;  indorsed  by  Republicans, 
34;  comparison  of  North  and  South, 
34-35;  40,  note;  attacks  on  slave 
holders,  37-40;  effect  of  the  book  on 
the  House,  41-45;  effect  on  the  country, 
45-46. 

Indiana,  laws  on  free  negroes,  84;  opposi 
tion  to  William  H.  Seward  at  Republi 
can  convention,  126;  on  territorial 
slavery  in  1847, 157;  application,  126;  of 
Northwest  Ordinance,  159 ;  small  Breck 
enridge  vote,  233. 

Infirmities  of  slaves,  48—50. 

Insurrection  of  slaves,  172-173. 

Internal  improvements  in  Republican 
platform,  125;  opposition  of  President 
Buchanan,  198-199;  support  of  the 
Republicans,  198;  Pacific  railroad, 
199-201;  Pacific  telegraph,  201. 

Iowa,  refuses  extradition  to  Virginia  of 
member  of  John  Brown's  band,  69; 
Congressional  power  over  its  territorial 
laws,  159;  small  Breckenridge  vote, 
233. 

Iowa  City,  Iowa,  negro  kidnapping  case, 
71. 

"Irrepressible  conflict,"  118-119;  for 
saken  by  William  H.  Seward  before 
the  party  convention,  119-120;  es 
poused  again  by  him  during  the  cam 
paign,  213. 


Jackson,  Andrew,  on  the  Supreme  Court, 
153-154. 

Jefferson,  Thomas,  on  slavery,  12,  161; 
on  emancipation,  40;  on  the  Supreme 
Court,  153. 

Johnson,  Andrew,  candidate  for  Demo 
cratic  presidential  nomination,  107; 
criticism  of  Republican  policy  as  to 
territories,  152. 

Johnson,  Herschel  V.,  Douglas  candidate 
for  the  vice  presidency,  109;  on  the 
break  up  of  the  Charleston  convention, 
108;  for  secession  in  1856,  185. 

Juarez,  Mexican  general,  142. 

Kansas,  Kansas-Nebraska  Act,  94;  lost 
to  the  South,  96,  100;  Lecompton  con 
stitution,  99-100. 

Kansas-Nebraska  Act,  cause  of  John 
Brown's  raid,  29;  followed  by  "  Unioa- 
saving"  meetings,  29;  prormoms  om 
slavery,  94;  unaffected  by  Dr«d  Scott 
decision,  97-98. 

Keitt,  L.  M.,  for  secession,  178. 

Kentucky,  extradition  of  criminals  from 
Northern  states,  69;  bill  on  free  ne 
groes,  83;  support  of  slavery  in  the 
Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  86;  rep 
resented  in  seceders'  Democratic  con 
vention,  107;  small  Lincoln  vote,  133. 

Key  West,  Florida,  temporary  home  of 
captured  Africans,  80-81. 

Kidnapping  of  free  negroes,  71-73. 

Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle,  148. 

Know-Nothing  party,  rejection  of  Seward, 
121. 

Knoxville,  Tennessee,  expulsion  of  aboli 
tionist,  21;  encounter  of  William  L. 
Yancey  and  W.  G.  Brownlow,  180; 
full  speech  by  W.  G.  Brownlow,  330. 

Lafayette,  French  general,  on  slavery,  16. 

Lancaster,  Pennsylvania,  kidnapping 
case,  71. 

Lane,  Henry  S.,  Republican  candidate 
for  Governor  in  Indiana,  126 ;  opposi 
tion  to  William  H.  Seward,  126. 

Lane,  Joseph,  Breckenridge  candidate 
for  the  vice  presidency,  109 ;  chance  for 
the  presidency,  if  choice  fell  to  the 
House  of  Representatives,  223. 

Lansing,  Michigan,  speech  of  William 
H.  Seward,  192. 

Lawrence,  Kansas,  Sentinel  on  kidnapping 
of  free  negroes,  71. 

Lawrence,  Massachusetts,  fall  of  Pern- 
berton  mills,  170,  note. 

League  of  United  Southerners,  177. 


350 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


Lecompton  constitution,  its  discussion 
in  Congress  attended  by  "  Union-sav 
ing"  meetings,  29;  the  quarrel  in  Con 
gress,  99-100. 

Lee,  Robert  E.,  in  command  of  United 
States  marines  at  Harper's  Ferry,  2. 

Lemmon,  Jonathan,  loses  slaves  in  New 
York,  70-71 ;  probable  appeal  to  the 
United  States  Supreme  Court,  70-71 ; 
probable  antislavery  decision  under 
Republican  administration,  164. 

Lexington,  Kentucky,  advertisement  of 
runaway  slaves,  17  ;  speech  by  Stephen 
A.  Douglas,  95. 

Lincoln,  Abraham,  forces  "Freeport 
doctrine"  from  Stephen  A.  Douglas, 
98 ;  refuses  Eastern  advice  to  support 
Douglas  for  the  United  States  sena- 
torship,  101 ;  presidential  nomination, 
126 ;  his  record,  126-127 ;  on  moral 
wrong  of  slavery,  127-129 ;  harmo 
nizes  factions,  129;  "honest,"  121, 
139-140,  opposition  to  the  Supreme 
Court,  155 ;  friendly  to  coercion, 
173 ;  his  election  a  justification  of 
secession,  163-165 ;  the  same  denied, 
181 ;  favors  destruction  of  slavery, 
193;  characterization,  209-211;  in 
active  in  the  campaign,  211-212; 
respected  by  Stephen  A.  Douglas, 
212 ;  snubbed  by  William  H.  Seward, 
213-214 ;  Republicans  only  gradually 
learned  to  honor  him,  231 ;  popular 
vote,  233. 

Logan,  John  A.,  draws  pistol  on  colleague 
in  House  of  Representatives,  43. 

London  Economist,  on  international  in 
fluence  of  cotton,  170. 

Lord,  Nathan,  president  of  Dartmouth 
College,  praises  slavery,  62. 

Louisiana,  supports  William  L.  Yancey 
in  1847,  93 ;  secession  from  Charleston 
convention  107 ;  delegates  rejected  at 
Baltimore,  108;  right  to  secede,  173; 
small  Breckenridge  majority,  233. 

Lovejoy,  Owen,  antislavery  speech  in 
the  House  of  Representatives,  47- 
51;  on  John  Brown,  51;  on  Helper's 
Impending  Crisis,  51 ;  on  rescue  of 
fugitive  slaves,  65. 

Lynn,  Massachusetts,  mourns  for  John 
Brown,  9. 

Madison,  James,  on  slavery,  40. 

Magrath,  Andrew  G.,  judge  of  the  United 
States  District  Court,  on  the  foreign 
slave  trade,  78. 


Maine,  personal  liberty  law,  67;  small 
Breckenridge  vote,  233. 

Majority  rule,  for  election  of  speaker 
in  the  House  of  Representatives,  43. 

Marching  clubs,  Republican,  see  Wide 
Awakes ;  Democratic,  228-229. 

Marcy,  William  L.,  "dinner  to  the  candi 
dates"  in  1856,  206. 

Marriage,  denied  to  slaves,  57,  61. 

Marshall,  Michigan,  threat  to  Southern 
ers  traveling  in  the  state,  70. 

Martinsburg,  Virginia,  aid  to  Harper's 
Ferry,  2. 

Maryland,  bill  on  free  negroes,  83 ; 
supports  slavery  in  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church,  85 ;  small  Brecken 
ridge  majority,  233  ;  small  Republican 
vote,  233. 

Mason,  James  M.,  moves  in  the  United 
State*  Senate  to  investigate  Harper's 
Ferry,  51-52;  wife  attacks  John  Brown 
and  Northern  abolitionists,  14-15. 

Massachusetts,  State  Senate  on  John 
Brown 's  death,  9 ;  industrial  condi 
tions  compared  with  those  in  North 
Carolina,  35 ;  personal  liberty  law,  67 ; 
on  territorial  slavery  in  1847,  157  ;  small 
Breckenridge  vote,  233. 

McClure,  William  S.,  expelled  from  South 
Carolina,  216. 

McLean,  John,  candidate  for  Republican 
presidential  nomination,  122. 

McQueen,  John,  encounter  with  Love- 
joy  of  Illinois  in  the  House  of  Repre 
sentatives  on  slavery,  49-50. 

McRae,  John  J.,  for  secession,  178. 

McWillie,  William,  for  secession,  178. 

Mecklenburg  Declaration  of  Indepen 
dence,  praised  by  candidate  Douglas, 
276. 

Medical  students  of  the  South,  departure 
from  the  North,  22. 

Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  for  ex 
pulsion  of  abolitionist  from  Alabama, 
21 ;  refused  charter  for  University 
in  Missouri,  23. 

Mexico,  suffers  aggression  from  the  United 
States,  142-146 ;  civil  war,  142 ;  out 
rages  on  Americans,  142-143;  at 
tempted  legislation  by  the  United 
States,  143;  attempted  treaty,  143- 
144;  Vera  Cruz  incident,  144-145; 
passed  over  by  Democratic  platforms, 
146;  no  hope  of  absorption  by  the 
United  States  under  a  Republican 
administration,  163. 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


351 


Michigan,  personal  liberty  law,  67; 
law  on  bringing  slaves  into  the  state, 
69 ;  on  territorial  slavery  in  1847,  156. 

Military  companies,  voluntary,  in  the 
South,  23. 

Milwaukee,  Wisconsin,  fugitive  slave 
case,  67-69. 

Minute  men,  constitution,  230. 

Miramon,  Mexican  general,  142. 

Mississippi,  bill  on  free  negroes,  83; 
supports  William  L.  Yancey  in  1847, 
93 ;  secession  from  Charleston  con 
vention,  107 ;  delegates  to  both  Rich 
mond  and  Baltimore  convention,  108. 

Missouri,  bill  on  free  negroes,  82-83 ; 
supports  slavery  in  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church,  86;  represented  in 
Democratic  seceders'  convention,  107  ; 
slavery  restricted,  159 ;  small  Douglas 
majority,  233 ;  small  Republican  vote, 
233. 

Mobile,  Alabama,  Register  on  territorial 
expansion  Southward,  147. 

Monroe,  James,  on  slavery,  40,  161. 

Montgomery,  Alabama,  William  L.  Yan 
cey  for  secession  176 ;  League  of  United 
Southerners,  177. 

Morgan,  J.  T.,  for  secession,  178. 

Natchez,  Mississippi,  advertisement  of 
runaway  slaves,  17. 

Nationalization  of  slavery,  70-71. 

Naturalization  law,  in  Republican  plat 
form,  125 ;  frauds,  138. 

Navy,  Secretary  of,  censured  for  cor 
ruption,  136. 

Navy  Yard,  Brooklyn,  New  York,  politi 
cal  conditions,  136-138. 

Nebraska,    Kansas-Nebraska   Act,   94. 

Newark,  New  Jersey,  speech  by  Stephen 
A.  Douglas,  206-207. 

New  Hampshire,  personal  liberty  law, 
67 ;  on  territorial  slavery  in  1847,  156 ; 
small  Breckenridge  vote,  233.  , 

New  Haven,  Connecticut,  Journal  and 
Courier  on  John  Brown,  31 ;  Palladium 
on  John  Brown,  31 ;  speech  by  Abraham 
Lincoln,  128;  Palladium  desires  fall 
of  slavery,  193. 

New  Jersey,  personal  liberty  law,  67; 
partial  victory  for  fusion,  233. 

New  York,  New  York,  arrival  of  refugees 
from  the  South,  21 ;  "Union-saving" 
meeting  26  ;  wealth  compared  with  that 
of  Virginia,  35;  fugitive  slaves,  66; 
fugitive  slaves  rendered  up  to  the  South, 
66 ;  attack  upon  slaves  of  visiting 


Southern  militia  company,  69 ;  Lem" 
mon  slave  case,  70-71 ;  fitting  out  of 
slavers,  76 ;  arrival  of  persecuted  free 
negroes  from  the  South,  84 ;  Lincoln 's 
Cooper  Union  speech,  127-128;  prob 
able  decline  from  loss  of  cotton  trade, 
171 ;  Republican  parade,  226-227 ; 
heavy  majority  against  Lincoln,  233; 
speech  by  William  L.  Yancey,  301; 
Evening  Post,  on  John  Brown,  30 ; 
statistics  on  foreign  slave  trade,  74 ; 
corruption  of  New  York  Legislature, 
131;  on  the  political  campaign,  231; 
Express,  on  absorption  of  Mexico,  145; 
Herald,  interview  with  John  Brown,  3; 
extracts  from  the  Impending  Crisis, 
34  ;  statistics  on  foreign  slave  trade,  74; 
letter  from  President  Buchanan  on 
corruption,  140-141 ;  on  Abraham  Lin 
coln,  210 ;  on  determination  of  William 
H.  Seward  to  rule  Abraham  Lincoln, 
214,  note;  popularity,  220;  Inde 
pendent  on  John  Brown,  30 ;  re 
demption  of  the  enslaved,  63-64 ;  ridi 
cules  proslavery  American  Tract 
Society,  88 ;  challenge  to  proslavery 
Observer,  89;  Observer,  excoriated  by 
William  Lloyd  Garrison,  10 ;  perse 
cuted  for  defense  of  slavery,  89; 
Times,  on  John  Brown,  31 ;  hedges 
on  popular  sovereignty,  150;  popular 
ity,  220;  Tribune,  on  John  Brown,  30; 
on  burning  of  slaves,  59-60;  on  re 
demption  of  slaves,  64 ;  on  fugitive 
slaves,  64 ;  ridicules  proslavery  Ameri 
can  Tract  Society,  88;  on  corruption 
of  New  York  Legislature,  121 ;  opposi 
tion  to  Seward  for  President,  121 ; 
hedges  on  popular  sovereignty,  150; 
on  Abraham  Lincoln,  211;  popularity, 
220;  World,  general  estimate  of  the 
campaign,  230-231. 

Newburyport,  Massachusetts,  mourns 
for  John  Brown,  9. 

Newspapers  of  the  North,  burned  in  the 
South,  22 ;  supported  by  government 
patronage,  134-136. 

Newspapers  of  the  South,  advertisements 
of  slavery  16,  17. 

New  York  State,  industrial  conditions 
compared  with  those  in  Virginia,  34 ; 
personal  liberty  law,  67;  legislative 
report  on  personal  liberty  laws,  67, 
note ;  suffrage  to  free  negroes,  84 ;  on 
territorial  slavery  in  1847,  157;  Re 
publican  defeat  of  fusion,  233, 


352 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


Nicholson  letter,  views  of  Lewis  Cass 
on  popular  sovereignty,  93,  note. 

Norfolk,  Virginia,  speech  by  Stephen 
A.  Douglas  on  secession  and  coercion, 
180-181. 

North  Carolina,  industrial  conditions 
compared  with  those  in  Massachusetts, 
35 ;  source  of  domestic  slave  trade, 
82 ;  represented  in  Democratic  se- 
ceders'  convention,  107. 

Northwestern  states,  alleged  sympathy 
with  the  South,  172. 

Norwich,  Connecticut,  newspaper  senti 
ment  on  John  Brown,  31. 

Nullification  of  United  States  law,  66-69. 

Objectionable  elements  of  slavery,  57. 

O 'Conor,  Charles,  on  slavery,  26;  on 
the  Lemmon  slave  case,  70—71,  71,  note. 

Ohio,  refusal  of  extradition  to  Virginia, 
69 ;  same  to  Kentucky  and  Tennessee, 
69  ;  on  territorial  slavery  in  1847,  157  ; 
small  Breckenridge  vote,  233. 

Oregon,  laws  on  free  negroes,  84;  with 
the  South  in  Democratic  convention, 
106;  forbids  slavery,  159;  small 
Lincoln  majority  233. 

Orleans,  territory,  organization,  160. 

Orion,  slaver,  73 ;  conviction  of  owner 
and  officers,  79,  note. 

Orr,  James  L.,  for  secession,  178. 

Ottawa,  Illinois,  rescue  of  a  fugitive  slave, 
65-66. 

Pacific  railroad,  in  Republican  platform, 
125  ;  arguments  for,  199-201. 

Pacific  telegraph,  201. 

Patents,  possible  infringement  of  United 
States  patents  by  an  independent 
Southern  Confederacy,  171. 

Patronage,  in  election  of  speaker  Pen- 
nington,  43 ;  corrupt  use  in  popular 
political  contests,  134-141 ;  to  cer 
tain  newspapers,  134-136 ;  signs  of 
reform,  140 ;  an  aid  in  creating  a  Repub 
lican  party  in  the  South,  164 ;  in  ac 
tual  practice  in  the  campaign,  224- 
225  ;  general  sweep  of  officers  expected 
under  new  administration,  225  ;  James 
Buchanan  and  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  287. 

Pemberton  mills,  Lawrence,  Massachu 
setts,  fall  of,  170,  note. 

Pennington,  William,  elected  speaker  of 
the  House  of  Representatives,  45,  and 
note ;  record,  44 ;  does  not  appoint 
his  own  committees,  44,  note;  candi 
date  for  Republican  presidential 
nomination,  122. 


Pennsylvania,  industrial  conditions  com 
pared  with  those  in  South  Carolina,  35  ; 
personal  liberty  law,  67  ;  opposition  to 
Seward  at  Republican  convention,  126 ; 
on  territorial  slavery  in  1847,  157 ;  Re 
publican  defeat  of  fusion,  233. 

Perry,  Edward  A.,  for  secession,  178. 

Persecution  of  Northern  men  in  Southern 
states,  19-22,  215-217. 

Personal  liberty  laws,  their  nature,  66-67 ; 
attitude  of  Virginia  legislature,  67, 
note ;  attitude  of  New  York  legisla 
ture,  67,  note. 

Pettus,  J.  J.,  for  secession,  178. 

Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania,  industrial 
prosperity  compared  with  that  of 
Charleston,  South  Carolina,  35 ;  fugi 
tive  slave  rendered  up  to  the  South,  66  ; 
arrival  of  persecuted  free  negroes  from 
the  South,  84 ;  Lincoln  majority,  233. 

Pierce,  Franklin,  inconspicuous  in  the 
campaign,  218. 

Platforms,   party,   237. 

Plurality  rule,  for  speakership  in  the 
House  of  Representatives,  43. 

Pole  raisings,  common  in  the  campaign, 
230. 

Polk,  James  K.,  President  of  the  United 
States,  investigated  by  Congress, 
133;  intention  to  veto  Wilmot  Pro 
viso,  159,  note. 

Pollard,  Edward  A.,  defense  of  slavery, 
61-62. 

Polygamy,  with  slavery  a  "twin  relic  of 
barbarism,"  47  ;  attempt  in  Congress  to 
forbid  it,  152,  note. 

Popular  sovereignty,  popularity  in  the 
South  in  1847,  93;  support  of  Lewis 
Cass,  93,  note ;  embodied  in  Kansas- 
Nebraska  Act,  94 ;  praised  by  President 
Buchanan  in  1856,  95 ;  desertion  of 
the  South,  96-97;  not  destroyed  by 
Dred  Scott  decision,  97-98 ;  differences 
in  1856  and  1860,  99;  distinguished  from 
squatter  sovereignty,  99,  note ;  favor 
able  arguments,  105-106 ;  in  majority 
platform  of  the  Democratic  party, 
106;  Douglas  arguments,  149-150; 
hedging  by  Republican  papers,  150- 
151 ;  positive  Republican  arguments, 
151-152;  demands  neutrality  on 
slavery,  184 ;  criticism  by  Carl  Schurz, 
258-260 ;  arguments  by  Stephen,  A. 
Douglas,  278-287;  record  of  Brecken 
ridge  party,  333-335. 

Popular  vote,  233. 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


353 


Postmaster  General,  corruption,  135,  138 ; 
allows  Southern  postmasters  to  destroy 
Northern  abolition  mail,  22,  249. 

Potter,  John  F.,  challenged  to  a  duel,  51. 

Powers,  James,  expulsion  from  South 
Carolina,  20. 

Presidency  of  the  United  States,  investi 
gated  by  Congress,  32 ;  the  procedure 
opposed  by  the  president,  133  ;  prece 
dents  on  the  point,  133-134 ;  possibil 
ity  of  a  presidential  election  in  the 
House  of  Representatives,  221-223; 
succession  to  the  presidency,  222,'  note. 

Prices,  cotton,  167 ;  negroes,  167. 

Property  in  slaves,  affirmed  by  citizens 
of  Georgia,  25 ;  in  Dred  Scott  decision 
96;  by  inference  denied  in  Republican 
platform,  237 ;  in  Breckenridge  plat 
form,  241-242. 

Provisional  Constitution  and  Ordinances 
for  the  People  of  the  United  States,  by 
John  Brown,  21,  note. 

Pryor,  Roger  A.,  threat  of  secession,  41- 
42 ;  encounter  with  Owen  Love  joy 
in  the  House  of  Representatives, 
49-50 ;  challenges  member  to  a  duel, 
51 ;  letter  from  William  L.  Yancey 
on  secession,  177;  for  secession,  178. 

Public  lands,  power  of  Congress  over 
them  denied,  96  ;  the  record  of  Congres 
sional  control  before  the  Dred  Scott 
decision,  158-159 ;  probably  open  to 
negroes  under  Republican  rule,  164; 
the  Homestead  Act,  201-204,  250. 

Public  printing,  corruption,  134-136. 

Questions  to  candidates  and  speakers: 
to  William  L.  Yancey,  165-167,  176, 
180,  215,  216,  322-328;  to  John  C. 
Breckenridge,  174-175,  184 ;  to  Stephen 
A.  Douglas,  180, 185,  294-296. 

Raleigh,  North  Carolina,  newspaper  ad 
vertisement  of  slaves,  17 ;  speech  by 
Stephen  A.  Douglas,  276. 

Randolph,  John,  on  slavery,  162. 

Reagan,  John  H.,  praise  of  slavery,  62-63. 

Redemption  of  slaves,  63—64. 

Redpath,  James,  author  of  Life  of  John 
Brown,  9 ;  evades  arrest  after  John 
Brown's  raid,  53. 

Republican  party,  see  Abraham  Lincoln, 
Hannibal  Hamlin,  Conventions,  Cam 
paign  arguments,  Aggression,  Secession, 
Slavery,  etc.;  favorable  criticism  by 
Carl  Schurz,  263-264. 

Repudiation  of  Northern  debts,  argu 
ment  for  secession,  171. 

2A 


Revolution,  right  of,  166. 

Rhett,  R.  B.,  for  secession,  178. 

Rhode  Island,  personal  liberty  law,  67; 
on  territorial  slavery  in  1847,  157 ; 
Republican  defeat  of  fusion,  233. 

Richmond,  Virginia,  expulsion  of  North 
ern  teachers,  21 ;  refuses  to  hear  lec 
ture  by  Bayard  Taylor,  21 ;  mourns 
at  election  of  Speaker  Pennington,  45 ; 
adjourned  session  of  the  Democratic 
seceders '  convention,  109 ;  the  Des 
patch  on  persecution  of  Northern 
men  in  the  South,  216. 

Rochester,  New  York,  a  citizen  expelled 
from  the  South,  21;  "Union-saving" 
meeting,  27-28;  a  fugitive  slave,  66; 
"irrepressible  conflict"  speech  by  Wil 
liam  H.  Seward,  118. 

Rowdyism  in  the  campaign,  uncommon, 
230. 

Roosevelt,  James  I.,  on  the  foreign  slave 
trade,  78. 

Sanborn,  Frank,  arrest  and  release,  53. 

Sandusky,  Ohio,  kidnapping  case,  71. 

Savannah,  Georgia,  expulsion  of  North 
ern  man,  20,  21 ;  slaves  of  Savannah 
Blues  in  danger  in  New  York,  69. 

Schurz,  Carl,  for  abolition  of  slavery, 
193  ;  speech  at  St.  Louis,  Missouri,  244. 

Scott,  Winfield,  inconspicuous  in  the 
campaign,  218. 

Secession,  the  right  affirmed  by  South 
Carolina  in  1852,  24 ;  affirmed  by  citi 
zens  of  Georgia,  25 ;  arguments,  162- 
197;  favorable  arguments,  163-172; 
dangers  to  slavery  lurking  in  a 
Republican  administration,  163-167 ; 
property  argument,  167—168 ;  hope  of 
foreign  intervention,  resulting  from 
international  influence  of  cotton,  168- 
170 ;  influence  of  cotton  in  the  North 
ern  states,  170-171 ;  tariff  argument, 
171 ;  possibility  of  stealing  United 
States  patents,  171 ;  possibility  of 
repudiating  Northern  debts,  171 ;  al 
leged  sympathy  of  the  Northwest 
with  the  South.  172  ;  arguments  against 
secession,  172-173 ;  increased  taxa 
tion,  172 ;  fear  of  servile  insurrection, 
172 ;  alienation  of  Northern  friends, 
173 ;  secession  impracticable,  173 ; 
right  of  acquired  states  to  secede,  173  ; 
when  to  secede,  173 ;  friendliness  of 
Breckenridge  party  to  secession,  174- 
178 ;  Bell-Everetts  oppose  secession, 
180;  Douglas  Democrats  oppose  se- 


354 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


cession,  180-184 ;  secession  record  of 
many  Southern  Douglasites,  185- 
186 ;  Republican  ridicule  of  secession, 
187-189 ;  general  justification  of  se 
cession,  195-196 ;  justification  of  the 
so-called  secession  conspiracy,  196- 
197;  discussion  by  Carl  Schurz,  264- 
268 ;  opposing  words  of  Stephen  A. 
Douglas,  295-296  ;  hedging  of  William 
L.  Yancey,  323-325 ;  record  of  Breck- 
enridge  party,  334-341. 

Sergeant  at  arms  in  House  of  Representa 
tives,  44,  note. 

Seward,  William  H.,  alleged  inspirer  of 
John  Brown,  28 ;  his  presidency  would 
cause  secession,  42 ;  draws  bill  on 
foreign  slave  trade,  78 ;  reasons  for 
loss  of  Republican  presidential  nom 
ination,  117-122;  his  hopes,  117-118; 
the  "irrepressible  conflict,"  118- 
119;  forsakes  the  idea,  119-120; 
offends  Border  state  conservatives, 
120-121 ;  offense  to  the  Know-Noth- 
ing  party,  121 ;  offense  to  the  mer 
chant  class  121 ;  corruption  of  the 
New  York  legislature,  121 ;  hostility 
of  the  New  York  Tribune,  121-122; 
his  feeling  of  superiority  to  Abraham 
Lincoln,  130,  213-214,  214,  note;  op 
position  to  the  Supreme  Court,  155  ; 
ridicule  of  secession,  189  ;  foresees  de 
struction  of  slavery^  ~T91v- 192 ;  his 
campaign  speeches,  122-213/;  again 
takes  up  with  the ' '  irreptessifeieconflict' ' 
idea,  213. 

Sherman,  John,  candidate  for  speaker  in 
the  House  of  Representatives,  32, 
41,  43. 

Singleton,  O.  R.,  threat  of  secession, 
42. 

Slaughter,  James,  letter  from  William 
L.  Yancey  on  secession,  176. 

Slave  auction,  60-61. 

Slave  code  for  territories,  demanded 
from  Congress  by  the  South,  102. 

Slave  trade,  domestic,  81-82. 

Slave  trade,  foreign,  73-81 ;  captures, 
73-74;  statistics,  74-75;  profits,  74; 
stay  of  the  market,  75 ;  description 
of  the  ocean  passage,  75 ;  alleged  com 
plicity  of  the  national  administration, 
75-79 ;  lax  administration  of  law  by 
Custom  House  officials,  76 ;  lax  ad 
ministrative  policy,  76-77 ;  indifference 
of  the  United  States  Senate,  78 ;  futile 
policy  of  the  courts,  78-79;  attitude 


of  the  political  parties,  79-80 ;  the 
Key  West  incident,  80-81 ;  denounced 
by  the  Republican  platform,  125 ; 
relation  to  the  policy  of  territorial 
expansion,  156 ;  would  be  curbed  by  a 
Republican  administration,  164 ;  Wil 
liam  L.  Yancey  on  the  slave  trade,  305. 

Slavery,  attacked  by  John  Brown,  1 ; 
Brown's  attitude,  4,  6;  moral  ground 
of  opposition,  3-5 ;  defense  by  wife 
of  Senator  Mason  of  Virginia,  14-15 ; 
attack  by  Mrs.  Childs,  15-19;  a 
cause  of  Southern  industrial  inferior 
ity,  36 ;  effect  on  the  condition  of  the 
Southern  soil,  37 ;  abolition  recom 
mended,  37-40 ;  testimony  of  many 
statesmen,  40 ;  attack  by  Owen 
Lovejoy  in  the  House  of  Represen 
tatives,  47-51 ;  attack  by  Charles 
Sumner,  56-58 ;  popular  discussion, 
59-91 ;  attitude  of  churches,  85-89 ; 
negroes  never  citizens,  97 ;  probably 
to  be  recognized  as  citizens  by  a  Re 
publican  administration,  164 ;  lia 
bility  of  a  servile  insurrection,  172 ; 
Republican  desire  for  abolition,  190- 
195 ;  justification  of  secession  in  its 
defense,  195-196 ;  justification  of 
Republicans  in  opposing  slavery,  196. 

Smith,  Caleb,  candidate  for  Republican 
presidential  nomination,  122. 

Soule,  Pierre,  a  Douglasite  with  a  seces 
sion  record,  185. 

South  Carolina,  calls  a  convention  of 
Southern  states,  24;  industrial  con 
ditions  compared  with  those  in  Penn 
sylvania,  35 ;  law  on  free  negroes, 
83-84  ;  support  principles  of  William 
L.  Yancey  in  1847,  93 ;  secedes  from 
national  Democratic  convention,  107 ; 
represented  in  Richmond  convention, 
108. 

Southern  commercial  convention,  on 
the  foreign  slave  trade,  79-80. 

Speakership  of  the  House  of  Represen 
tatives,  contest  in  thirty-sixth  Con 
gress,  33-45 ;  effect  of  the  contest 
on  the  country,  45-46. 

Spoils  system,  see  patronage. 

Spring   elections,    three   states,    120. 

Springfield,  Illinois,  visit  of  William  H. 
Seward  to  home  of  Abraham  Lincoln, 
213-214;  Republican  parade  and 
mottoes,  227-228. 

Springfield,  Massachusetts,  Republican 
hedges  on  popular  sovereignty,  151. 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


355 


St.  Clair,  Arthur/  dismissed  from  office, 
159. 

St.  Clair  Flats,  Michigan,  improvements 
desired,  189-199. 

St.  Joseph,  Missouri,  speech  of  Wil 
liam  H.  Seward,  192. 

St.  Louis,  Missouri,  Evening  News  on  the 
burning  of  slaves,  59-60 ;  domestic 
slave  trade,  82 ;  Lincoln's  majority, 
233;  speech  by  Carl  Schurz,  244. 

St.  Paul,  Minnesota,  speech  by  William 
H.  Seward,  189. 

Stearns,  George  L.,  supporter  of  John 
Brown,  13. 

Stephens,  A.  H.,  Douglasite  with  se 
cession  record,  185. 

Sumner,  Charles,  his  assault  followed  by 
"Union-saving"  meetings,  29  ;  attacks 
slavery  in  the  United  States  Senate, 
56-58;  retort  to  Senator  Chestnut, 
57-58 ;  opposition  to  the  Supreme 
Court,  155  ;  favors  abolition  of  slavery, 
193. 

Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States, 
contest  with  the  Supreme  Court  of 
Wisconsin  over  habeas  corpus,  67-69  ; 
its  decision  of  the  Lemmon  case, 
nationalizing  slavery,  anticipated, 
70-71 ;  a  decision  opening  the  foreign 
slave  trade  feared,  78-79  ;  appealed  to 
in  the  Kansas-Nebraska  Act,  94  ; 
the  Dred  Scott  decision,  96-97; 
sudden  support  of  the  Democratic 
party,  153 ;  the  previous  hostility 
of  the  Democrats  to  the  tribunal,  153- 
154 ;  the  sudden  hostility  of  the  Re 
publicans,  154-155 ;  reverses  '  itself 
in  the  Dred  Scott  case,  160 ;  its  pos 
sible  control  by  the  Republicans,  164. 

Syracuse,  New  York,  Republican  trans 
parencies,  227. 

Taney,  Roger  B.,  Chief  Justice  of  the 
United  States  Supreme  Court,  pro 
motes  Democratic  factions  by  the 
Dred  Scott  decision,  92;  the  Dred 
Scott  decision,  96-97 ;  its  acceptance 
by  the  South,  96-97. 

Tariff,  protective  in  Republican  plat 
form,  125 ;  opposition  of  the  South, 
164,  171,  251 ;  support  of  the  Repub 
licans,  197-198. 

Tavernier,  slaver,  75. 

Taylor,  Bayard,  cancellation  of  lecture 
at  Richmond,  Virginia,  21. 

Taylor,  Miles,  Douglasite  with  secession 
record,  185. 


Taylor,  Zachary,  President  of  the  United 
States,  his  death  followed  by  "Union- 
saving"  meetings,  29. 

Tennessee,  source  of  the  domestic  slave 
trade,  82 ;  bill  on  free  negroes,  83. 

Territories  controlled  by  Congress,  158- 
159;  spread  of  slavery,  149-153;  the 
Dred  Scott  decision  fastens  slavery  on 
them,  96-99;  probably  to  be  cut 
up  into  free  states  by  the  Republicans, 
164. 

Texas,  law  on  free  negroes,  84 ;  supports 
William  L.  Yancey  in  1847,  93;  se 
cedes  from  the  national  Democratic 
convention,  107 ;  sends  delegates  to 
both  Richmond  and  Baltimore  con 
ventions,  108  ;  secession  justified,  173  ; 
persecutions  of  Northern  men,  216- 
217. 

Tilton,  Theodore,  on  Horace  Greeley, 
220,  221,  note. 

Tippecanoe,  Indiana,  popular  sover 
eignty  speech  in  1856  by  John  C. 
Breckenridge,  95-96. 

Tonnage  duties  recommended  by  Presi 
dent  Buchanan  for  St.  Clair  Flats, 
Michigan,  199. 

Trade,  direct  from  the  South  to  Europe, 
23. 

Transparencies,  Democratic,  194,  note, 
228,  229  ;  Republican,  226-228. 

Traveling  slaves,  tampered  with  in  the 
North,  67-71. 

Troy,  New  York,  rescue  of  a  fugitive 
slave,  66. 

Tyler,  John,  inconspicuous  in  the  cam 
paign,  218. 

"Union-saving"  meetings,  26-29;  pro- 
slavery  sentiments  at  New  York,  26 ; 
the  same  in  Massachusetts,  27 ;  reso 
lutions  at  Rochester,  New  York, 
27—28 ;  criticism  of  the  movement  in 
the  South,  29;  its  criticism  by  the 
Republicans,  29-30. 

Vallandigham,  Clement  L.,  on  John 
Brown,  2  ;  interviews  Brown,  4. 

Van  Buren,  Martin,  inconspicuous  in 
the  campaign,  218. 

Vera  Cruz,  Mexico,  fire  of  the  American 
fleet  on  the  Mexicans,  144 ;  unnoticed 
by  the  Democratic  platform,  146. 

Vermont,  personal  liberty  law,  66-67 ; 
small  Breckenridge  vote,  233. 

Vicksburg,  Mississippi,  the  Sun  on  the 
burning  of  slaves,  60. 

Virginia,   on  personal    liberty  laws,   67, 


356 


PRESIDENTIAL  CAMPAIGN 


note;  on  refusal  of  Northern  states  to 
honor  her  extradition  papers,  69 ; 
sources  of  the  domestic  slave  trade, 
82 ;  law  on  free  negroes,  84 ;  support 
slavery  in  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
/lOhurch,  86;  small  Bell  majorityl 
233  ;  small  Republican  vote,  233.  J 
^a3e,  Benjamin  F.,  candidate  for  Re 
publican  presidential  nomination,  122. 

Wages,  withheld  from  slaves,  17. 

Walker,   William,   filibuster,    146-147. 

Wanderer,  slaver,  73. 

War,  Secretary  of,  corruption,  138-139. 

Ward,  Artemas,  on  Stephen  A.  Douglas, 
207-209. 

Washington,  George,  on  slavery,  40, 
161. 

Water  Witch,  attacked  in  Paraguay,  146. 

Watertown,  New  York,  kidnapping  case, 
71. 

Webster,  Daniel,  little  remembered  in  the 
campaign,  220. 

Weed,  Thurlow,  Republican  boss  in  New 
York,  121. 

Wendell,  Cornelius,  testimony  on  the 
corruption  of  the  administration, 
134-136. 

Wentworth,  John,  ridicules  secession, 
188 ;  desires  fall  of  slavery,  191. 

Wesleyan  Methodist  Church,  splits  from 
the  parent  church,  85. 

West  Newbury,  Massachusetts,  mourns 
for  John  Brown,  9. 

Wickliffe,  Robert  C.,  Douglasite  with 
secession  record,  185. 

Wide  Awakes,  origin,  225 ;  spread,  225- 
226 ;  nature,  226 ;  their  parades,  226- 
228. 

Wigfall,  Louis  T.,  ridicules  following 
"the  Fathers,"  162-163. 

Wildfire,  slaver,  73. 

William,  slaver,  73. 

Wilmot  Proviso,  supported  by  a  faction 
of  the  Democratic  party,  93. 

Wilson,  Henry,  introduces  bill  in  United 
States  Senate  on  the  foreign  slave 
trade,  78 ;  advice  to  Illinois  Repub 
licans  to  return  Stephen  A.  Douglas 


to  the  United  States  Senate,  101; 
candidate  for  the  Republican  presi 
dential  nomination,  122  ;  opposition  to 
the  Supreme  Court,  155. 

Winsted,  Connecticut,  newspaper  sen 
timent  on  John  Brown,  31. 

Wisconsin,  personal  liberty  law,  67; 
contest  by  the  State  Supreme  Court 
with  the  United  States  Supreme  Court 
over  habeas  corpus,  67-69 ;  on  terri 
torial  slavery  in  1847,  157 ;  its  terri 
torial  laws  submitted  to  Congress, 
159  ;  small  Breckenridge  vote,  233. 

Wise,  Henry  A.,  on  John  Brown,  3; 
criticism  of  Wise's  conduct  at  Har 
per  's  Ferry,  22 ;  speaks  to  Southern 
medical  students,  22 ;  on  trade  with 
the  North,  23 ;  speech  on  Southern 
agricultural  conditions,  37. 

Worcester,  Massachusetts,  the  Spy  on 
Abraham  Lincoln,  211. 

Worth,  Daniel,  tried  for  selling  copies 
of  the  Impending  Crisis,  46. 

Yancey,  William  L.,  leader  of  a  faction 
in  the  Democratic  party,  92 ;  oppo 
sition  to  the  Wilmot  Proviso,  93 ; 
opposition  to  the  Compromise  of 
1850,  94;  on  "the  Fathers,"  163; 
on  the  menace  to  slavery  of  a  Re 
publican  administration,  165-167 ;  on 
the  property  argument  for  secession, 
168 ;  speeches  and  sentiments  for 
secession,  176-178,  178,  note;  ex 
coriates  W.  G.  Brownlow,  180;  al 
leged  offer  to  him  of  vice  presidency 
on  the  Douglas  ticket,  186 ;  his  words 
used  to  prove  the  secessionist  plot  to 
break  up  the  Charleston  convention, 
197;  characterization,  214;  campaign 
speeches  in  the  North,  214-218; 
further  on  the  Republican  menace 
to  slavery,  215,  217-218;  on  the 
persecution  of  Northern  men  in  the 
South,  215-217 ;  reaps  credit  for  the 
views  of  John  C.  Calhoun,  220 ; 
New  York  speech  in  full,  301 ;  on 
secession  and  coercion,  323-327. 

Zuloaga,  Mexican  general,  142. 


/TAHE  following  pages  contain  advertisements 
of  Macmillan  books  on  kindred  subjects 


History  of  the  United  States 

FROM  THE  COMPROMISE  OF  1850  TO  THE  FINAL  RESTORATION  OF 
HOME  RULE  IN  THE  SOUTH  IN  1877 

By  JAMES   FORD    RHODES 

Complete  in  7  octavo  volumes,  attractively  bound 
in  dark  blue  cloth  with  gilt  tops  and  lettering. 
Price  $17.50  net;  expressage  extra.  Per  volume 
$  2.50  net;  by  mail,  $  2.72. 

Fancy  bindings:  Half  light  calf  or  half  morocco 
$32.00  net;  three-quarters  blue  levant  $40.00  net. 

VOLUME  I,  1850-1854;  VOLUME  II,  1854-1860 ;  VOLUME  III,  1860-1862  ; 
VOLUME  IV,  1862-1864;  VOLUME  V,  1864-1866;  VOLUME  VI,  1866-1872; 
VOLUME  VII,  1872-1877. 

Readers  of  Mr.  Fite's  Social  and  Industrial  Conditions  in  the  North  During 
the  Civil  War  will  be  interested  to  compare  Dr.  James  Ford  Rhodes's  account 
of  the  conditions  prevalent  in  the  country  from  1860  to  1865  (Vols.  Ill  andV 
of  the  History)  and  of  the  causes  in  the  preceding  decade  which  led  to  these 
conditions. 

"The  work  is  thoroughly  admirable  in  point  of  style  —  clear,  concise,  and 
really  fascinating  in  its  narrative.  A  more  thoroughly  readable  book  has 
seldom  been  written  in  any  department  of  literature.  .  .  .  We  commend  these 
volumes  to  those  in  search  of  a  war  history,  as  much  the  most  readable  and 
interesting,  as  well  as  the  most  genuinely  instructive,  of  anything  on  the  sub 
ject  that  has  yet  appeared.  The  work  will  afford  a  revival  of  memories  to  the 
older  class  of  readers  and  a  value  in  instruction  to  the  younger,  difficult  to  be 
overestimated."  —  The  Boston  Herald. 

"  Mr.  Rhodes  possesses  the  dramatic  instinct  in  no  inconsiderable  degree,  with 
the  faculty  to  seize  on  the  essential  points  of  interest  in  a  narrative  and  to  so 
set  his  scene  and  group  his  characters  that  the  persons  live  for  us  and  the  in 
cidents  stand  out  clear  cut  and  full  of  movement.  In  telling  the  story  of  a 
nation  composed  of  a  number  of  federated  states,  the  historian  is  necessarily 
confronted  with  one  inherent  difficulty,  in  that  the  events  in  those  several 
states  by  no  means  always  follow  the  same  course,  and  it  often  occurs  that  the 
threads  of  the  same  narrative  have  to  be  traced  separately  in  each.  In  doing 
this,  there  is  constant  danger  of  losing  grip  of  the  unity  of  the  narrative  as 
a  whole,  and  of  overloading  it  with  detail.  With  this  difficulty  Mr.  Rhodes 
wrestles  with  more  than  usual  success."  —  J^he  London  Times. 
"  Mr.  Rhodes's  « History  of  the  United  States '  is  marked  by  a  tone  of  such 
judicial  fairness  towards  both  men  and  measures  that  it  finds  no  superior  since 
the  days  of  Thucydides."  —  John  T.  Morse  in  The  Quarterly  Review. 


PUBLISHED    BY 

THE   MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

64-66  FIFTH  AVENUE,   NEW  YOBK 


SPECIAL  PHASES  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY 


The  Opening  of  the  Mississippi 

A  struggle  for  supremacy  in  the  American  interior. 

By  FREDERICK   AUSTIN    OGG, 

Fellow  in  History,  Harvard  University.  Cloth,  I2mo,  $  2.00  net 


Civil  War  and  Reconstruction  in  Alabama 
By  WALTER    L.    FLEMING,  Ph.D., 

Professor  of  History  in  West  Virginia  University.  Cloth,  8vo,  $5.00  net 


The  History  of  South  Carolina 

From  the  inception  of  the  Colony  to  the  end  of  the  Revolution. 

By  EDWARD    McCREADY,  LL.D., 

Member  of  the  Bar  at  Charleston,  S.C.,  and  President  of  the  Historical  Society 
of  South  Carolina.  Four  volumes,  each,  cloth,  8vo,  $3.50  net 


South  Carolina  as  a  Royal  Province 
By  W.    ROY    SMITH,  Ph.D., 


Associate  Professor  in  History  at  Bryn  Mawr  College.      Cloth,  8vo,  $2.50  net 


North  Carolina 

A  Study  in  English  Colonial  Government. 

By  CHARLES    LEE    RAPER,  Ph.D., 

Associate  Professor  in  Economics  and  Associate  Professor  of  History  in  the 
University  of  North  Carolina.  Cloth,  13  +  260  pp.,  Svo,  $  2.OO  net 


A  History  of  the  Pacific  Northwest 
By  JOSEPH    SCHAFER, 

Head  of  the  Department  of  History,  University  of  Oregon.     With  maps  and 
illustrations.  Cloth,  321  pp.,  l6mo,  $1.25  net 

History  of  the  State  of  Washington 
By  EDMOND    S.    MEANY, 

Professor  of  History  in  the  University  of  Washington.  Cloth,  $2.25  net 


SPECIAL  PHASES  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORY  -  Continued 


The  Economic  History  of  Virginia 
in  the  Seventeenth  Century 

By  PHILIP   ALEXANDER    BRUCE 

An  inquiry  into  the  material  condition  of  the  people,  based  upon  original  and 
contemporaneous  letters.  Cloth,  vi  +  647  pp.,  $  5.00  net 


From  the  Cotton  Field  to  the  Cotton  Mill 
By  HOLLAND   THOMPSON, 

A  study  of  the  industrial  transition  in  North  Carolina. 

Sometime  Fellow  in  Columbia  University.        Cloth,  820  pp.,  I2mo,  $1.50  net 


Boston :  The  Place  and  The  People 
By  M.    A.    DsWOLFE    HOWE 

With  over  one  hundred  illustrations,  including  many  from  pen  drawings. 

Cloth,  I2mo,  $2.00  net 

Philadelphia:  The  Place  and  The  People 
By  AGNES    REPPLIER 

With  eighty-two  illustrations  from  drawings  by  Ernest  C.  Peixotto. 

Cloth,  I2mo,  $  2.0O  net 

New  Orleans :  The  Place  and  The  People 
By  GRACE    KING 

With  eighty-three  illustrations  from  drawings  by  Frances  E.  Jones. 

___ Cloth,  I2mo,  $2.00  net 

Charleston  :  The  Place  and  The  People 
By  MRS.    H.   JULIEN    RAVENEL 

Illustrated  from  photographs  and  drawings  by  Vernon  Howe  Bailey. 

Cloth,  I2mo,  $2.00  net 

The  Lower  South  in  American  History 
By  WILLIAM    GARROTT   BROWN 

Cloth,  I2mo,  $1.50  net 

PUBLISHED    BY 

THE   MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

64-66  FIFTH  AVENUE,  NEW  YORK 


The  Promise  of  American  Life 
By  HERBERT    CROLY 

Cloth,  I2mo,  $2.00  net 

PRESIDENT  J.  G.  SCHURMAN  OF  CORNELL  UNIVERSITY  writes  of  this 
book :  "  I  regard  Mr.  Croly's  book  as  a  serious  and  weighty  contribu 
tion  to  contemporary  American  politics.  A  treatise  on  the  fundamental 
political  ideas  of  the  American  people  which  attempts  to  develop  their 
full  content  and  to  re-read  American  history  in  the  light  of  these  de 
veloped  ideas  cannot,  of  course,  be  made  light  literature  ;  but  the  author 
brings  to  the  weighty  subject  with  which  he  deals  a  lucid  and  vivacious 
style  and  a  logical  sense  of  arrangement.  And  thoughtful  readers  who 
are  interested  in  fundamental  political  principles,  once  they  have  started 
the  book,  are  pretty  certain  to  finish  it.  ...  For  my  own  part  I  have 
found  the  book  exceedingly  stimulating.  It  is  also  instructive,  for 
the  author  seems  to  be  thoroughly  versed  in  the  modern  political 
and  economic  history  not  only  of  America  but  of  Europe  as  well. 
Finally,  the  volume  has  the  immense  attraction  of  dealing  with  a  sub 
ject  which  of  all  political  subjects  is  now  most  prominent  in  the  mind 
not  only  of  thoughtful  citizens  but  one  might  almost  say,  of  the  Ameri 
can  people." 

The  Spirit  of  America 

By  Professor  HENRY   VAN    DYKE 

Cloth,  I2mo,  Ready  February  16,  igio 

The  basis  of  this  volume  is  the  addresses  delivered  by  Professor  van 
Dyke  in  Paris  as  the  exchange  professor  sent  by  America  to  the 
Sorbonne.  The  author's  wide  experience  with  many  distinct  aspects 
of  our  national  life,  his  great  ability,  and  his  personal  sincerity  and 
thoughtful  ness,  all  combine  to  render  him  eminently  fitted  for  the  im 
portant  task  which  he  has  undertaken  in  this  book.  To  perceive  the 
enduring  and  valuable  elements  in  the  kaleidoscope  of  the  America  of 
to-day,  requires  a  far-seeing,  keen  eye,  whose  vision  has  been  trained 
by  long  preparation.  In  this  book  the  fruit  of  years  of  application  and 
reflection  is  clearly  apparent. 


PUBLISHED   BY 

THE   MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

64-66  FIFTH  AVENUE,   NEW  YOBK 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


MAR  1  5  196G  2 

o 

6Vr-         t*          •    J-llft* 

W/1R  2  01070  ^ 

IN  SiAOCS 

"-'  '   *   & 
tf<pr*  '  -3 

r.;».  -  1  ;ybb 
& 

/A 

G  20197539 

«• 

D 

^      •' 

FP'n  in    T  P  °  - 

A    "'o      11    /\M  *y  f» 

B 
APR 

EtrOLD     "fro 
231967  62 

i  <  <-     li  MSY1    •  O 

RECEIVED 

• 

*    '67 

Hfte^'     MAY1 

V. 

JUU3I9876Q 


JUL7   '67-UAI 


General  Library 
University  of  California 


•***r4 


